PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Gut Defense to pay for social handouts


HonestChieffan
07-01-2010, 08:04 PM
http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/28/debts-deficits-and-defense/#ixzz0sHtTdthk

Bill Parcells
07-01-2010, 08:07 PM
I didnt read the article. but thats classic liberalism ''channeling Jimmy Cahter'' raise taxes and cut defense budget and blame Bush..yeah yeah, thats right thats right

FD
07-01-2010, 08:11 PM
Aren't these just the cuts Secretary of Defense Gates called for?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/08/AR2010050802495.html

lostcause
07-02-2010, 02:24 AM
If we did cut defense spending to improve the standard of living in the US it would be a fucking amazing thing. Killing Iraqis or feeding homeless people in our cities? Really guys?

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 05:53 AM
I don't know what the big deal is. It's not like the Russians are still spying on us or anything like that.

patteeu
07-02-2010, 06:23 AM
If we did cut defense spending to improve the standard of living in the US it would be a ****ing amazing thing. Killing Iraqis or feeding homeless people in our cities? Really guys?

Spoken like someone who (a) doesn't appreciate how incredibly prosperous the American poor are relative to the majority of people in the world and (b) does not appreciate how dangerous the real world is, particularly in the absence of the stabilizing presence of American military power.

Turn the US into Sweden and both the US and Sweden lose.

Amnorix
07-02-2010, 06:28 AM
We grossly overspend on the military. There's really not much doubt about that.

But we also can't fix our deficits on military spending cuts, nor can we afford to keep running massive deficits.

I'd be happy to buy votes for military spending reductions by giving up "welfare" or other social programs as well.

WE NEED THE DEFICIT FIXED!

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 06:31 AM
We grossly overspend on the military. There's really not much doubt about that.

But we also can't fix our deficits on military spending cuts, nor can we afford to keep running massive deficits.

I'd be happy to buy votes for military spending reductions by giving up "welfare" or other social programs as well.

WE NEED THE DEFICIT FIXED!

So you are saying the men and women who defend us--- without whom none of us is afforded the luxury or convenience of talking freely on this forum--- are overpaid?

Hydrae
07-02-2010, 06:37 AM
So you are saying the men and women who defend us--- without whom none of us is afforded the luxury or convenience of talking freely on this forum--- are overpaid?

When we spend more on defense than the rest of the world then yes, I think we might be able to find a line item or two that can be removed without catastrophic results. This is not a call to pay the troops less money. I would expect labor costs are not the highest expenditure for the military (depending on how you do your accounting).

patteeu
07-02-2010, 06:37 AM
We grossly overspend on the military. There's really not much doubt about that.

But we also can't fix our deficits on military spending cuts, nor can we afford to keep running massive deficits.

I'd be happy to buy votes for military spending reductions by giving up "welfare" or other social programs as well.

WE NEED THE DEFICIT FIXED!

I'm sure there is some defense spending that no longer matches up with the threats we face. That's the nature of defense spending where programs take years to mature and where the threat keeps changing. But I disagree that we dramatically overspend on defense. That said, I'm not against cutting some programs that either haven't worked out or that no longer make sense, but the first step for deficit reduction needs to be rolling back the completely irresponsible spending spree the current administration has been on. Even then, the primary focus needs to be on pruning entitlements.

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 06:41 AM
When we spend more on defense than the rest of the world then yes

And all that spending...

Prevented the Soviets and/or the Chicoms from taking us over and alot of other countries, too.

Amnorix
07-02-2010, 06:46 AM
So you are saying the men and women who defend us--- without whom none of us is afforded the luxury or convenience of talking freely on this forum--- are overpaid?

Nope, I don't think they are overpaid. However, military salaries are only a small slice of the military budget.

Amnorix
07-02-2010, 06:51 AM
I'm sure there is some defense spending that no longer matches up with the threats we face. That's the nature of defense spending where programs take years to mature and where the threat keeps changing. But I disagree that we dramatically overspend on defense. That said, I'm not against cutting some programs that either haven't worked out or that no longer make sense, but the first step for deficit reduction needs to be rolling back the completely irresponsible spending spree the current administration has been on. Even then, the primary focus needs to be on pruning entitlements.

I agree on the entitlements, etc, though I imagine our particular items of focus and overall amounts would greatly differ.

When the US alone spends as much on the military as the entire rest of the world combined, however, it really doesn't leave alot of room for doubt that we are overspending. Eisenhower himself said to beware the military-industrial complex, and there's really not much doubt that he was right, and that the military-industrial complex has had it's way on a pretty unfettered basis for 40+ years.

And he was a five star general who then became President, in case you weren't aware. :p

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 06:52 AM
Nope, I don't think they are overpaid. However, military salaries are only a small slice of the military budget.

Very true. The same can be said about our public education system.

Amnorix
07-02-2010, 06:55 AM
And all that spending...

Prevented the Soviets and/or the Chicoms from taking us over and alot of other countries, too.

Chicoms. I love it. You're out of central casting for the McCarthy era.

Up to now, the Chinese have never been a threat to "take us over". Until only a few decades ago they could barely get a warship afloat, much less somehow "take us over".

That said, they certainly are a threat in the future.

But military power is PREDICATED on economic and industrial power. If you spend everything on having a great military now, to the sacrifice of your economic well-being, then in the long run you will be weaker.

But I doubt you could ever comprehend long term thinking.

Nor is it necessarily true that being much bigger AND MORE AGGRESSIVE more likely to give you long term security, peace and stability. But you're so blinded by American-centric thinking I doubt you could ever understand that either. If you ever had the ability to step out of your John Wayne shoes, you might see that much of the rest of the world doesn't think of us as "good ole boys who don't cause no trouble if you don't cause them none."

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 06:57 AM
http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/28/debts-deficits-and-defense/#ixzz0sHtTdthk

HCF---

Military spending is considered "discretionary", and social handouts are "mandatory".

Mandatory spending are those government payments that are enacted by law, and are not required to have any approval by Congress. Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and interest are by far the three largest mandatory payments on the national debt.

Amnorix
07-02-2010, 06:57 AM
Very true. The same can be said about our public education system.

I don't believe most of the public education cost are funded by the federal government.

Amnorix
07-02-2010, 06:59 AM
HCF---

Military spending is considered "discretionary", and social handouts are "mandatory".

Mandatory spending are those government payments that are enacted by law, and are not required to have any approval by Congress. Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and interest are by far the three largest mandatory payments on the national debt.

You are of course technically correct, but to call military spending truly "discretionary" is pretty silly. Sure, Congress needs to refund every year, but it's not like they start at zero and go from there making independent determinations on each program every year. That's comical and would be an unworkable system.

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 07:00 AM
I don't believe most of the public education cost are funded by the federal government.


So why does the federal government control public education if they do not fund it?

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 07:01 AM
You are of course technically correct, but to call military spending truly "discretionary" is pretty silly. Sure, Congress needs to refund every year, but it's not like they start at zero and go from there making independent determinations on each program every year. That's comical and would be an unworkable system.

Military spending is discretionary. Hence the thread.

stevieray
07-02-2010, 07:02 AM
If you ever had the ability to step out of your John Wayne shoes, you might see that much of the rest of the world doesn't think of us as "good ole boys who don't cause no trouble if you don't cause them none."

does my ass look big in these pants?

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 07:03 AM
does my ass look big in these pants?

ROFL

Yes, in fact it does. Amnorix popped a rod.

Bearcat2005
07-02-2010, 07:06 AM
We grossly overspend on the military. There's really not much doubt about that.

But we also can't fix our deficits on military spending cuts, nor can we afford to keep running massive deficits.

I'd be happy to buy votes for military spending reductions by giving up "welfare" or other social programs as well.

WE NEED THE DEFICIT FIXED!


Agreed, conservatives and liberals are going to have to cut spending on their "platform pets" in order to fix this, the entitlement state and defense spending must be cut. For all you Neo-Cons out there, we can cut military spending by JUST reducing the amount of bases abroad. Seriously we are over reaching and it will cause the house of cards to collapse.

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 07:10 AM
Agreed, conservatives and liberals are going to have to cut spending on their "platform pets" in order to fix this, the entitlement state and defense spending must be cut. For all you Neo-Cons out there, we can cut military spending by JUST reducing the amount of bases abroad. Seriously we are over reaching and it will cause the house of cards to collapse.

I agree, let's get out of Germany and Korea. And the Osprey is a POS.

What are we going to do about SS and Medicare, though?

Bearcat2005
07-02-2010, 07:15 AM
I agree, let's get out of Germany and Korea. And the Osprey is a POS.

What are we going to do about SS and Medicare, though?

I agree, we need to quit subsidizing the defense of many of these nations in Europe and Asia.
We need to take a serious look at those programs, the unfunded liabilities alone with just those two programs exceed 30 trillion dollars (maybe more). You cannot be serious about bringing down the debt and getting this country's affairs in order without having a conversation about the direction of those programs. Cuts, cuts and more cuts, for far too long America has "prime pumped" and minipulated our currency to pay for such entitlements, now we need to take our lumps and pay.

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 07:23 AM
I agree, we need to quit subsidizing the defense of many of these nations in Europe and Asia.
We need to take a serious look at those programs, the unfunded liabilities alone with just those two programs exceed 30 trillion dollars (maybe more). You cannot be serious about bringing down the debt and getting this country's affairs in order without having a conversation about the direction of those programs. Cuts, cuts and more cuts, for far too long America has "prime pumped" and minipulated our currency to pay for such entitlements, now we need to take our lumps and pay.

I believe the cause of that was the politicians buying votes from the baby boomers. The ponzi scheme blew up because the pre-boomer retirees are living far beyond the projected life expectancy when the politicians began their scheme.

With the right leadership, we could weather this fiscal storm (the baby boomers and current retirees will inevitably pass away). The demographics in the US would be much more manageable fifty years from now.

But we don't have quality leadership. Instead of reworking on medicare and SS, congress has expanded these programs and added several more.

And the population is exploding with non-producers who become an extra burden on an already vulnerable economy.

Let me ask you something---

Based on the reality of the situation, how soon before the country goes belly up?

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 07:34 AM
Nope, I don't think they are overpaid. However, military salaries are only a small slice of the military budget.

Excerpt from the link:

Active duty Army personnel will be slashed from 562,400 to 360,000.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/28/debts-deficits-and-defense/#ixzz0sX1cxHuk

Did you even read the article, Pete Stark?

Bearcat2005
07-02-2010, 07:43 AM
I believe the cause of that was the politicians buying votes from the baby boomers. The ponzi scheme blew up because the pre-boomer retirees are living far beyond the projected life expectancy when the politicians began their scheme.

With the right leadership, we could weather this fiscal storm (the baby boomers and current retirees will inevitably pass away). The demographics in the US would be much more manageable fifty years from now.

But we don't have quality leadership. Instead of reworking on medicare and SS, congress has expanded these programs and added several more.

And the population is exploding with non-producers who become an extra burden on an already vulnerable economy.

Let me ask you something---

Based on the reality of the situation, how soon before the country goes belly up?

Of course it was to in a sense buy votes, you cannot pay for these programs if you do not raise taxes to incredible levels (which will get you out of office) so you just print and inflate the currency and establish a form of unlegislated taxation. Allowing the government this much economic power is the problem, we have had poor fisical leadership over the years because politicans believe collective intelligence of Washington is superior to 300 million plus buying and selling in a most part freer market.

As to your question I have no idea, I do know that this cannot be continued, it will not sustain itself and if we do nothing a currency collapse will put us on the ash heap of history.

patteeu
07-02-2010, 08:42 AM
When we spend more on defense than the rest of the world then yes, I think we might be able to find a line item or two that can be removed without catastrophic results. This is not a call to pay the troops less money. I would expect labor costs are not the highest expenditure for the military (depending on how you do your accounting).

I don't know if you read the OP link or not, but the defense cuts in question are far more than a line item or two.

Hydrae
07-02-2010, 09:26 AM
I don't know if you read the OP link or not, but the defense cuts in question are far more than a line item or two.

No, I have not had/taken the time to do that yet. This was more of a general response to the topic.

FD
07-02-2010, 10:54 AM
I agree, we need to quit subsidizing the defense of many of these nations in Europe and Asia.
We need to take a serious look at those programs, the unfunded liabilities alone with just those two programs exceed 30 trillion dollars (maybe more). You cannot be serious about bringing down the debt and getting this country's affairs in order without having a conversation about the direction of those programs. Cuts, cuts and more cuts, for far too long America has "prime pumped" and minipulated our currency to pay for such entitlements, now we need to take our lumps and pay.

The problem is that the benefits go to the old at the expense of the young, and the old are who votes. Any attempt to reduce the benefits will be met with a backlash at the polls. Just look at the attempt the Obama administration made to cut future medicare spending. The GOP immediately decried it as "death panels."

The Mad Crapper
07-02-2010, 11:16 AM
The GOP immediately decried it as "death panels."

Riiiiiiiiight because the dem's never use lies and fear tactics to ram their socialist agenda down everyone's throat:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27726.html

You're probably too young to remember all the "homeless families" that were perishing all over America when Ronald Reagan was president so I won't even bother to lexus nexus any of that.

patteeu
07-02-2010, 01:43 PM
No, I have not had/taken the time to do that yet. This was more of a general response to the topic.

:thumb:

The article raises the specter of cutting major capabilities like number of carrier battlegroups, number of navy fighter wings, and number of nuclear submarines in half or so. :shake: