Support for Atlasia's Soldiers Bill

[Gabu]

Just so I know, what would the funding increase on account of this bill be?

[Gabu]

Can people please give less propagandised names to their bills?

No.

Besides, how is increasing soldiers' pay not supporting them?

I believe that Hughento's main complaint is that the name implies that to oppose this bill means that you don't support the troops.

I'm still waiting for an answer with regards to how much of a spending increase this would translate into, by the way.

[Gabu]

If we estimate 250,000 soldiers serving in the Middle East during FY 2006, that's 750 million. Assuming 1.4 million active duty, that's another 1.4 billion in spending. Total approximately could come out to anywhere from 2.0 to 2.5 billion dollars.

In that case, I have to ask why those who supported abolishing the NEA and the NEH based on the fact that it would save us the money it did would support a spending increase that is ten times what was cut with that bill.

I recognize that it's defense spending, which is generally treated as separate from all other spending, but it still completely defeats the stated purpose of abolishing the NEA and the NEH, given that now we'll have to cut another couple billion dollars from the budget to fit this in.

If some who supported abolishing the NEA and the NEH also oppose this spending increase, then I congratulate those people for being consistent.

[Gabu]

Abstain.

[Gabu]

Well, given that my vote doesn't count for a whole lot on this one anyway, I'm going to give a symbolic "nay" purely to voice a protest against this two- or three-billion dollar spending increase at a time when extra funding is not exactly easy to come by.

If you want to tell me that this proves that I hate the troops, go right ahead.