Petition to Build Death Star Prompts Hilarious Response from White House

[f-14]

· The construction of the Death Star has been estimated to cost more than $850,000,000,000,000,000. We're working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it.

that sure is the biggest crock of b.s. i ever heard, the way the yearly national deficit has expanded and compounded and the doubling of the national debt to 16 trillion dollars from 8 in 3 years i could have sworn they had already started construction on the death star!

 

[f-14]

on and i forgot to mention the way it is supposed to triple to 22 trillion dollars 6 years into his 8 years, are they sure they haven't started construction on the death star? if not where the hell is all this money going to?!

 

[f-14]

that 22 trillion must be for that clone army, right emperor Obamatine

 

[spartanmk2]

21st century and we STILL don't have AT-ATs

 

[COLGeek]

Given how bad the news (shootings, economy, politics, etc) has been lately, something with a bit of humor goes a long way to brighten the day.

 

[jaber2]

funny enough the program would have cost us nothing since all taxes to pay for this program would be from people and companies working on the program, the pyramids was a scheme from the pharaohs to spend the taxes they collected and in return pay their citizens to build something that has lasted longer than anything we build now. During their times the people of Egypt benefited from all the contract work and labor they had in abundance, they ended having almost 0% unemployment and even outsourced most workers. we should learn a lesson from ancient Egyptians.

 

[jdhirst]

[citation][nom]waikano[/nom]"We're working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it." This has to the funniest line in the whole thing...[/citation]

waikano, it is hard work to reduce the deficit. Put yourself in their shoes for a moment. It sucks because you have to keep spending to satisfy all the promises you made to the special interest groups while trying to cut spending on things that won't hurt you politically. As if that wasn't enough work you have to appear to want to reduce spending--as if it were the right thing to do--even though you know that the gov't really ought to be running people's lives because it knows best. So, as you can see, it's hard work to reduce the deficit. Now about that death star, perhaps it would be useful to build a smaller version...

 

[ven1ger]

[citation][nom]f-14[/nom]that 22 trillion must be for that clone army, right emperor Obamatine[/citation]

Since you want to bring up the debt, look at what got us to the 15 Trillion in debt, which interestingly certain people want to blame on Obama. Try two wars that started back in 2003, that were not on the books. When Obama came into office he put the wars back on the books and then we started noticing that we were paying for it by borrowing money. The Bush era tax cuts also put a big hole in the budget that has also helped with this big hole that we are in. Since the Reagan years, the debt was already rising. Since 2003, the debt started a much steeper climb.

 

[robochump]

Bummer. I just cant wait to SSTO crafts that we can use!!!

 

[davewolfgang]

Since you want to bring up the debt, look at what got us to the 15 Trillion in debt, which interestingly certain people want to blame on Obama. Try two wars that started back in 2003, that were not on the books. When Obama came into office he put the wars back on the books and then we started noticing that we were paying for it by borrowing money. The Bush era tax cuts also put a big hole in the budget that has also helped with this big hole that we are in. Since the Reagan years, the debt was already rising. Since 2003, the debt started a much steeper climb.

So since you claim the wars are what caused all the over spending, please tell us what percentage of the budget is defense?

Here - I'll give you a hint - it's 20%. That's right only 20%. So since we are spending 40% over what we take in (~40 cents of every dollar our government spends has to be borrowed), you can take 100% of the military spending out - AND WE ARE STILL OVER SPENDING BY 20%.

So please tell us again how Military spending (which by the way is what the government is SUPPOSE to be spending out taxpayer dollars on) is the problem and not the OTHER 80% of the budget (giving MY tax dollars to people who did not earn it, which - by the way - IS not in the Constitution)????????

And tax cuts don't "cost" the government anything - it's not THEIR money. In fact - and this can be proven by actual REAL history - the BEST way to increase money going into the Treasury - is to lower taxes. Because then people get to keep more of the money they earn and they SPEND it and the economy gets better. Go find the money going into the treasury, and you will find it goes up faster when taxes are cut, than when they are increased. And no - the debt didn't start to climb ridiculously until 2007 - please let us know who was in charge of both houses of Congress in 2007.

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/101712-629790-data-debunk-deficit-exploding-tax-cuts-myth.htm?p=full

Now let's get back to tech news and comments.

 

[jaws32]

well still death star will useless and just a rumor...

why we need to destroy a planet, star or a galaxy

 

[Guest]

I'd focus on the 100 year Starship project and keep my eye on Utah and Nevada to see if it's not already done.

 

[waikano]

[citation][nom]jdhirst[/nom]waikano, it is hard work to reduce the deficit. Put yourself in their shoes for a moment. It sucks because you have to keep spending to satisfy all the promises you made to the special interest groups while trying to cut spending on things that won't hurt you politically. As if that wasn't enough work you have to appear to want to reduce spending--as if it were the right thing to do--even though you know that the gov't really ought to be running people's lives because it knows best. So, as you can see, it's hard work to reduce the deficit. Now about that death star, perhaps it would be useful to build a smaller version...[/citation]


Very Valid points jdhirst...I'm sure they are working VERY hard... ;-)

 

[unksol]

funny enough the program would have cost us nothing since all taxes to pay for this program would be from people and companies working on the program, the pyramids was a scheme from the pharaohs to spend the taxes they collected and in return pay their citizens to build something that has lasted longer than anything we build now. During their times the people of Egypt benefited from all the contract work and labor they had in abundance, they ended having almost 0% unemployment and even outsourced most workers. we should learn a lesson from ancient Egyptians.

Funny enough, are you on crack? never mind Americans don't want too work. Never mind your insane. Taxing people who work to give free stuff to assholes is moronic.

Never mind Egypt is a hell hole

If they take your money. Then pay you that money back to do what they want. That's slave labor. You're not payed. You get your own. Money back for being their slave. are you retarded?

 

[rwinches]

Nah, A Borg Cube.
You know what they say "Once you go Borg you never go back"

 

[ven1ger]

So since you claim the wars are what caused all the over spending, please tell us what percentage of the budget is defense?

Here - I'll give you a hint - it's 20%. That's right only 20%. So since we are spending 40% over what we take in (~40 cents of every dollar our government spends has to be borrowed), you can take 100% of the military spending out - AND WE ARE STILL OVER SPENDING BY 20%.

So please tell us again how Military spending (which by the way is what the government is SUPPOSE to be spending out taxpayer dollars on) is the problem and not the OTHER 80% of the budget (giving MY tax dollars to people who did not earn it, which - by the way - IS not in the Constitution)????????

And tax cuts don't "cost" the government anything - it's not THEIR money. In fact - and this can be proven by actual REAL history - the BEST way to increase money going into the Treasury - is to lower taxes. Because then people get to keep more of the money they earn and they SPEND it and the economy gets better. Go find the money going into the treasury, and you will find it goes up faster when taxes are cut, than when they are increased. And no - the debt didn't start to climb ridiculously until 2007 - please let us know who was in charge of both houses of Congress in 2007.

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/101712-629790-data-debunk-deficit-exploding-tax-cuts-myth.htm?p=full

Now let's get back to tech news and comments.

I'll give you a hint, your 20% for military spending is what it costs to keep the military going and doesn't account for cost of wars or didn't you realize have active duty members sent off to fight wars cost additional monies that were never accounted for in their budgets, cost of replacement of equipment, cost of paying soldiers to go and fight, cost of fixing up our soldiers, cost of fixing up Iraq's and Afghanistan's infrastructure. You have no further to look for where the overspending is. Pray tell if you believe otherwise, what has the current administration done differently that is costing the additional monies that has so raised the debt. Also take into account that the Debt was not truly reflected before 2008 because the previous administration never put the cost of the wars on the books. So, if you want to blame the current administration for the debt, please provide facts to what has the current administration done to cost this much debt. Even the 2 past stimulus doesn't account for the severe rise of the debt. Let's not blame SS or Medicaid programs because nothing was accomplished in the previous administration to curb costs.

As far as you are claiming about lowering taxes, let's not mix the two segments, the rich and the middle class. Middle class tax cuts I agree with you does make the economy better, because they spend it, what does the rich do, nothing, except sock it away or throw millions into the coffers of the party that has been giving them these rich payouts so they can get more payouts. The tax cuts for the rich has already been proven to be a fallacy that it would help jobs, tax cuts for the rich has only deepen the hole that has the previous administration made a lot deeper, how many jobs did the previous administration, oh yeah, factor in the recession, etc, it was a net loss of jobs. Even the current administration has a net positive for the last 4 years. Previous administration has given us the housing crisis, the bank crisis, severe recession, net loss of jobs, 2 wars (1 of those wars I consider to be an act of aggression, where are the WMDs?), hundreds of thousands if not millions dead, 10's of thousands of our own soldiers maimed for life, and thousands dead. A great 8 years with tax breaks for the wealthy.

Now if you keep to your word, let's get back to tech news, it was you trying to interject your political falsehoods on here, which I am only responding to.

 

[davewolfgang]

I'll give you a hint, your 20% for military spending is what it costs to keep the military going and doesn't account for cost of wars or didn't you realize have active duty members sent off to fight wars cost additional monies that were never accounted for in their budgets, cost of replacement of equipment, cost of paying soldiers to go and fight, cost of fixing up our soldiers, cost of fixing up Iraq's and Afghanistan's infrastructure. You have no further to look for where the overspending is. Pray tell if you believe otherwise, what has the current administration done differently that is costing the additional monies that has so raised the debt. Also take into account that the Debt was not truly reflected before 2008 because the previous administration never put the cost of the wars on the books. So, if you want to blame the current administration for the debt, please provide facts to what has the current administration done to cost this much debt. Even the 2 past stimulus doesn't account for the severe rise of the debt. Let's not blame SS or Medicaid programs because nothing was accomplished in the previous administration to curb costs.

As far as you are claiming about lowering taxes, let's not mix the two segments, the rich and the middle class. Middle class tax cuts I agree with you does make the economy better, because they spend it, what does the rich do, nothing, except sock it away or throw millions into the coffers of the party that has been giving them these rich payouts so they can get more payouts. The tax cuts for the rich has already been proven to be a fallacy that it would help jobs, tax cuts for the rich has only deepen the hole that has the previous administration made a lot deeper, how many jobs did the previous administration, oh yeah, factor in the recession, etc, it was a net loss of jobs. Even the current administration has a net positive for the last 4 years. Previous administration has given us the housing crisis, the bank crisis, severe recession, net loss of jobs, 2 wars (1 of those wars I consider to be an act of aggression, where are the WMDs?), hundreds of thousands if not millions dead, 10's of thousands of our own soldiers maimed for life, and thousands dead. A great 8 years with tax breaks for the wealthy.

Now if you keep to your word, let's get back to tech news, it was you trying to interject your political falsehoods on here, which I am only responding to.

You really have drunk the Kool-aid.

So what are you going to do on the 9th day after you tax the rich? Because that's all it will last - 8 days. Are you going to then take more?? Why don't you ask NYCity what happened to their tax income when they RAISED taxes on the "rich"? You seem to FORGET that when the gov taxes something and RAISES the tax on something (Income, boats, cigs), something ELSE happens that they NEVER, EVER include in their calculations - people CHANGE THEIR BEHAVIOR.

In NY City - the rich moved away - so NY city got ZERO. So collecting some to collecting none is an increase?

Ask the Luxury boat industry in the New England states what happened when the taxes were raised on the selling/buying of those boats...oh, that's right you can't ask them anymore, they went out of business.

States keep raising taxes on Cigs (for "health" reasons, hahahahahaha) and so more people quit or find another way to buy their smokes - and the states take in LESS revenue in that tax.

Now you probably aren't going to understand those three items that are HISTORICALLY ACCURATE - i.e. - they already happened.

And YES that 20% IS the military budget, it DOES include everything you mentioned about pay and upkeep and all that - but yet in a way, they haven't been included in a budget - because we haven't HAD A BUDGET in over 4 years. So you are correct in that they aren't "in a budget" but not the way you claim. You wanna talk about overspending - how about that first 800 billion TARP. That was suppose to go to fix the housing, right AND be a one time payment? So not only did not one penny of that 800 Billion NOT go to fix the housing mess - for the last 4 years that 800 Billion has been spent. That's 3.2 TRILLION that NOBODY knows where it went - why? Because we don't have a budget!!!!

Now to your OTHER Fallacy - so that "rich" guy doesn't live in a big house? He doesn't have nice cars? He doesn't charter (or own) jets? He doesn't have a nice boat (see above- they have to buy them in Europe now)? He doesn't have 3 vacation homes? Are you saying those "rich" guys live in a 2 bedroom small house and just "stash" the money under their mattress, or bury it in their backyard?

OR

Do they actually go and SPEND it on nice things - which companies have to build those nice houses, and make those nice cars and hire people to manufacture and transport and sell and provide service and upkeep and also create jobs so spare parts can be manufactured, etc, etc.....i.e. what makes the economy GO. (AND by the way, pay taxes on all the things he buys and charters and rents.)

Unless someone got rich illegally (let's ask the Kennedy's about that, shall we???) - then it's their money. If someone had a great idea - convinced a bank to loan them money to start up making it, and hiring others to help, and marketed it with a product idea that a whole bunch of people wanted to buy and spend money on, and so he has to make more and hire more have EMPLOY more people and makes more money, etc, etc. It's NONE of your business, none of my business, and especially none of Governments business HOW MUCH MONEY HE HAS.

And that's the difference between me and all you libs - I would rather more people be like HIM. Not want that rich guy (by STEALING what he earned) to be "just" middle class and posting on Tom's Hardware like us.

 

[ven1ger]

You really have drunk the Kool-aid.

Do they actually go and SPEND it on nice things - which companies have to build those nice houses, and make those nice cars and hire people to manufacture and transport and sell and provide service and upkeep and also create jobs so spare parts can be manufactured, etc, etc.....i.e. what makes the economy GO. (AND by the way, pay taxes on all the things he buys and charters and rents.)

Unless someone got rich illegally (let's ask the Kennedy's about that, shall we???) - then it's their money. If someone had a great idea - convinced a bank to loan them money to start up making it, and hiring others to help, and marketed it with a product idea that a whole bunch of people wanted to buy and spend money on, and so he has to make more and hire more have EMPLOY more people and makes more money, etc, etc. It's NONE of your business, none of my business, and especially none of Governments business HOW MUCH MONEY HE HAS.

And that's the difference between me and all you libs - I would rather more people be like HIM. Not want that rich guy (by STEALING what he earned) to be "just" middle class and posting on Tom's Hardware like us.

Guess, you'd rather talk lunatic fringe politics instead of tech... Mostly see, a bunch of rhetoric than actual information.

Got rid of a lot of blather about State taxes, well if the rich want to move away fine let them move away, this is the United States where the rich can put their monies in the Cayman islands and other tax shelters.

As for the military spending, consider this that was 20% per year, now factor it into your debt that has 20% of military spending that was never accounted since the start of US aggression into Iraq and the invasion of Afghanistan, guess that is where your so-called missing monies are. Military spending when not in wartime is used to pay salaries and replace equipment, but guess what when there is a war, we use up materiel and men a whole lot faster and it costs more, especially when you have to rebuild what you blew up. As for the rest, considering how the current crop of Republicans would rather cut off their noses (or screw the public) than do what's right for the entire US and not just cave to a bunch of far right lunatics.

Who are all the libs? I'm no libertarian, was once considering it due to an awesome economics professor but reality trumped ideals. Don't know what you are but stop spewing trash.

Now if we can get back to tech stuff like I thought you wanted but, this is my last post in this thread on this, but I'll let you froth if that is your desire.

 

[acadia11]

Man, I think some of these posters should fact check themselves, 2009 is a Bush budget year, not Obama,the debt was roughly 12 trillion and the deficit was 1.2 trillion, the debt will be about 16.5 trillion after this year, round about the debt has increased by 5 trillion under Obama, although nearly all that debt would hav accrued regardless as it's really a function of US obligations that existed before Obama. The deficit after this year will be about 900 billion and actually has shrunk each year but 1 since Obama took office. Contrary to popular talking points Obama has not increased deficit and only had 1 initiative that is attributable spending to him, that being the working families pay roll tax cut, cash for clunkers, auto bailout... all I this was paid out of the $800 billion stimulus fund of which we've only spent about 750 billion or roughly $150 billion annually since Obama took office, so basically even if you want to argue about deficit only 10% of it actually can be attributed to Obama spending, in reality it was a 1 time charge which appeared on the 2010 balance sheet.