<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: I&#8217;ve been reading&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/</link>
	<description>The blog of the mystery writer, screenwriter and CEO of Pajamas Media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:22:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: larry</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71396</link>
		<dc:creator>larry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2005 02:30:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71396</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m gonna shoot from the hip.  Unemployment is NOT where it&#039;s been for a long time.  It went down recently  faster than the population grew.  More are employed, fewer unemployed, than just a handful of years ago.  Prove otherwise, MB.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m gonna shoot from the hip.  Unemployment is NOT where it&#8217;s been for a long time.  It went down recently  faster than the population grew.  More are employed, fewer unemployed, than just a handful of years ago.  Prove otherwise, MB.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ElMondo</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71395</link>
		<dc:creator>ElMondo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 16:16:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71395</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;&quot;Fact: Current defense spending is historically low, as budget share or % of GDP.&quot;&lt;/i&gt;



To buttress Larry&#039;s statement there (and also to avoid directly feeding the troll): He&#039;s right. The highest percentage of defense spending relative to the Gross Domestic Product was in 1945, when it was nearly 38% of GDP (http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-relative-size.php#gdp-graph). The next highest was in 1952 when it was a touch about 13% of GDP. Since then? Under 10%. When Reagan was president in the 80&#039;s, it&#039;s fluctuated from 6.2% in &#039;86 to 5.8% when he left office. When Clinton was in office, it ran down from 4.8% of GDP to 3.0% when the current president (Bush) was elected. The latest estimate of defense spending as percentage of GDP was for 2003, when it was estimated to be 3.3% (http://www.countryfacts.com/unitedstates/military).



It&#039;s true that America is financing a lot of debt, but the military spending is not the big ticket item on that bill.



Like a documentary on ancient Rome I once saw said (I have to paraphrase here; don&#039;t have the exact quote):&lt;i&gt; What&#039;s not amazing is that the US has such large military capacity. What is amazing is that, relative to it&#039;s spending power, it&#039;s achieved that feat relatively cheaply.&lt;/i&gt; I&#039;m not about to say that the military is &lt;i&gt;cheap&lt;/i&gt;, so don&#039;t misread that. All I&#039;m saying is that many countries spend far more as a percentage of their total wealth that the US does. Again, estimated 3.3% of GDP in 2003.



Bottom line: Military spending is not what&#039;s weighing down the total budget. It&#039;s not driving America into the poorhouse.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;Fact: Current defense spending is historically low, as budget share or % of GDP.&#8221;</i></p>
<p>To buttress Larry&#8217;s statement there (and also to avoid directly feeding the troll): He&#8217;s right. The highest percentage of defense spending relative to the Gross Domestic Product was in 1945, when it was nearly 38% of GDP (<a href="http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-relative-size.php#gdp-graph" rel="nofollow">http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-relative-size.php#gdp-graph</a>). The next highest was in 1952 when it was a touch about 13% of GDP. Since then? Under 10%. When Reagan was president in the 80&#8242;s, it&#8217;s fluctuated from 6.2% in &#8217;86 to 5.8% when he left office. When Clinton was in office, it ran down from 4.8% of GDP to 3.0% when the current president (Bush) was elected. The latest estimate of defense spending as percentage of GDP was for 2003, when it was estimated to be 3.3% (<a href="http://www.countryfacts.com/unitedstates/military" rel="nofollow">http://www.countryfacts.com/unitedstates/military</a>).</p>
<p>It&#8217;s true that America is financing a lot of debt, but the military spending is not the big ticket item on that bill.</p>
<p>Like a documentary on ancient Rome I once saw said (I have to paraphrase here; don&#8217;t have the exact quote):<i> What&#8217;s not amazing is that the US has such large military capacity. What is amazing is that, relative to it&#8217;s spending power, it&#8217;s achieved that feat relatively cheaply.</i> I&#8217;m not about to say that the military is <i>cheap</i>, so don&#8217;t misread that. All I&#8217;m saying is that many countries spend far more as a percentage of their total wealth that the US does. Again, estimated 3.3% of GDP in 2003.</p>
<p>Bottom line: Military spending is not what&#8217;s weighing down the total budget. It&#8217;s not driving America into the poorhouse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71394</link>
		<dc:creator>john</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 07:28:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71394</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.plumbingonline.org&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;I&lt;/a&gt; agree with you the way you view the issue. It is also interesting to see different viewpoints &amp; learn useful things in the discussion.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.plumbingonline.org" rel="nofollow">I</a> agree with you the way you view the issue. It is also interesting to see different viewpoints &amp; learn useful things in the discussion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: monkyboy</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71393</link>
		<dc:creator>monkyboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 05:42:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71393</guid>
		<description>I stayed up late last Friday watching the Canadian Curling Championship.  Great match, 8-7 was the final score.  Odds are good only a handful of my fellow Americans were watching along with me.



Iran is the same way.  No matter how hard you guys try, few Americans care about Iran.  Harsh language isn&#039;t an act of war.  North Korea and Pakistan already have nukes.  Congress will never approve military action against Iran after seeing how this administration handled Iraq.



It is nice to have a place to share your obscure interests, though:



http://www.curling.ca/news/articles/1211161948.asp




</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I stayed up late last Friday watching the Canadian Curling Championship.  Great match, 8-7 was the final score.  Odds are good only a handful of my fellow Americans were watching along with me.</p>
<p>Iran is the same way.  No matter how hard you guys try, few Americans care about Iran.  Harsh language isn&#8217;t an act of war.  North Korea and Pakistan already have nukes.  Congress will never approve military action against Iran after seeing how this administration handled Iraq.</p>
<p>It is nice to have a place to share your obscure interests, though:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.curling.ca/news/articles/1211161948.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.curling.ca/news/articles/1211161948.asp</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Syl</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71392</link>
		<dc:creator>Syl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 04:53:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71392</guid>
		<description>monkyboy



&lt;i&gt;While the U.S. is a military threat to third-world countries, we don&#039;t really threaten China, India, Russia or Europe with our military.&lt;/i&gt;



Why aren&#039;t you ashamed to be seen in public?



Of course we don&#039;t threaten India...India is an ally, you jerk. We have no reason to threaten Russian or Europe or even China for that matter.



Why didn&#039;t you mention Iran? For all the talk about our broken military, Iran doesn&#039;t believe a word of it. Neither does Syria. They know damn well that they could be next.



And in the continuing line of false &#039;facts&#039; you spout, the government does not fund the internet.



monkyboy



Get yourself some new gurus. Your current ones are failing you.












</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>monkyboy</p>
<p><i>While the U.S. is a military threat to third-world countries, we don&#8217;t really threaten China, India, Russia or Europe with our military.</i></p>
<p>Why aren&#8217;t you ashamed to be seen in public?</p>
<p>Of course we don&#8217;t threaten India&#8230;India is an ally, you jerk. We have no reason to threaten Russian or Europe or even China for that matter.</p>
<p>Why didn&#8217;t you mention Iran? For all the talk about our broken military, Iran doesn&#8217;t believe a word of it. Neither does Syria. They know damn well that they could be next.</p>
<p>And in the continuing line of false &#8216;facts&#8217; you spout, the government does not fund the internet.</p>
<p>monkyboy</p>
<p>Get yourself some new gurus. Your current ones are failing you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Syl</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71391</link>
		<dc:creator>Syl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 04:44:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71391</guid>
		<description>monkyboy needs a basic lesson in economics.



&lt;i&gt;U.S. defense contractors benefit from all this spending, but America as a whole doesn&#039;t.&lt;/i&gt;



Or at least a flowchart of where the money goes.



Defense contractors hire people. Those people make salaries from the money defense contractors make from the products those employees make. Moneys leftover go into R&amp;D for new product development, for opening up new plants which hire more people who make salaries to feed their families and pets.



Defense contractors don&#039;t just wave a wand and hand out armored vehicles or anything else. They PAY employees to make them.



And those employees, with the money they make from their defense contract employers might even buy you a Christmas present this year. Or at the very least spend some cash at the mall.



It&#039;s your damn ignorance, monkyboy, that is so frustrating.



I didn&#039;t know this shit either a couple of years ago but you&#039;d better believe I didn&#039;t want to sound as stupid as you do when I was arguing so I made sure I learned it.




</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>monkyboy needs a basic lesson in economics.</p>
<p><i>U.S. defense contractors benefit from all this spending, but America as a whole doesn&#8217;t.</i></p>
<p>Or at least a flowchart of where the money goes.</p>
<p>Defense contractors hire people. Those people make salaries from the money defense contractors make from the products those employees make. Moneys leftover go into R&amp;D for new product development, for opening up new plants which hire more people who make salaries to feed their families and pets.</p>
<p>Defense contractors don&#8217;t just wave a wand and hand out armored vehicles or anything else. They PAY employees to make them.</p>
<p>And those employees, with the money they make from their defense contract employers might even buy you a Christmas present this year. Or at the very least spend some cash at the mall.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s your damn ignorance, monkyboy, that is so frustrating.</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t know this shit either a couple of years ago but you&#8217;d better believe I didn&#8217;t want to sound as stupid as you do when I was arguing so I made sure I learned it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chuck</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71390</link>
		<dc:creator>chuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:09:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71390</guid>
		<description>MB,



&lt;i&gt;just look at New Orleans to see your future under these jackals...&lt;/i&gt;



Blanco, Nagin, and the rest of the corrupt Louisiana Democrats do seem to be a harbinger. Best reason there is not to let those suckers back into power.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MB,</p>
<p><i>just look at New Orleans to see your future under these jackals&#8230;</i></p>
<p>Blanco, Nagin, and the rest of the corrupt Louisiana Democrats do seem to be a harbinger. Best reason there is not to let those suckers back into power.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: monkyboy</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71389</link>
		<dc:creator>monkyboy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 01:03:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71389</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Fact: National defense is one of very few legtimate functions of the federal governmment.&lt;/i&gt;



Libertarian twaddle is not fact, Larry.  When are you guys gonna set up your own country and stop posting on the U.S. government funded and invented internet?



Unemployment as a percentage is about where its been for a long time.  As the country grows, more and more people are unemployed and living in poverty.



Real median wages continue to fall in the U.S. - 6 years in a row now.  It&#039;s great to be rich in Republican America.  If you&#039;re not rich...just look at New Orleans to see your future under these jackals...
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Fact: National defense is one of very few legtimate functions of the federal governmment.</i></p>
<p>Libertarian twaddle is not fact, Larry.  When are you guys gonna set up your own country and stop posting on the U.S. government funded and invented internet?</p>
<p>Unemployment as a percentage is about where its been for a long time.  As the country grows, more and more people are unemployed and living in poverty.</p>
<p>Real median wages continue to fall in the U.S. &#8211; 6 years in a row now.  It&#8217;s great to be rich in Republican America.  If you&#8217;re not rich&#8230;just look at New Orleans to see your future under these jackals&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: larry</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71388</link>
		<dc:creator>larry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:35:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71388</guid>
		<description>MB, do your  masters at DU/MOVEON/KOS bother to tell you that Brown &amp; Root is one of less than a handful of companies capable of doing the work?  Or that other administrations, including Clinton&#039;s, awarded them billions in no-bid contracts because of that?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MB, do your  masters at DU/MOVEON/KOS bother to tell you that Brown &amp; Root is one of less than a handful of companies capable of doing the work?  Or that other administrations, including Clinton&#8217;s, awarded them billions in no-bid contracts because of that?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: larry</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71387</link>
		<dc:creator>larry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:27:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2005/12/16/ive-been-reading/#comment-71387</guid>
		<description>MB, don&#039;t let facts  get in the way of your talking points.



Fact:  National defense is one of very few legtimate functions of the federal governmment.



Fact:  Since the &#039;03 &quot;tax cuts for billionaires&quot;, federal revenues have sharply increased.



Fact:  Current defense spending is historically low, as budget share or % of GDP.



Connect the dots.  Defense spending isn&#039;t the cause of the federal deficit.  If it were, well we are at war, you know.  We&#039;ll have to spend whatever it takes to get it done.



BTW, unemployment&#039;s historically low, too.  Why don&#039;t we let Mom and Dad feed their children?



I&#039;d give you cites for the facts I&#039;ve mentioned, but I&#039;m old.  you&#039;re young.  You obviously need the exercise.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MB, don&#8217;t let facts  get in the way of your talking points.</p>
<p>Fact:  National defense is one of very few legtimate functions of the federal governmment.</p>
<p>Fact:  Since the &#8217;03 &#8220;tax cuts for billionaires&#8221;, federal revenues have sharply increased.</p>
<p>Fact:  Current defense spending is historically low, as budget share or % of GDP.</p>
<p>Connect the dots.  Defense spending isn&#8217;t the cause of the federal deficit.  If it were, well we are at war, you know.  We&#8217;ll have to spend whatever it takes to get it done.</p>
<p>BTW, unemployment&#8217;s historically low, too.  Why don&#8217;t we let Mom and Dad feed their children?</p>
<p>I&#8217;d give you cites for the facts I&#8217;ve mentioned, but I&#8217;m old.  you&#8217;re young.  You obviously need the exercise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

