A messsage or reason from an unexpected source.

[roninspoon]

“As many frustrated Americans who have joined the Tea Party realize, we cannot stand against big government at home while supporting it abroad. We cannot talk about fiscal responsibility while spending trillions on occupying and bullying the rest of the world. We cannot talk about the budget deficit and spiraling domestic spending without looking

Comments

[montieth]

Actually, there's a very hard case to make for the Military being the part that's bankrupting the government. In fact, if you look at the spending of the Fed.gov, the biggest grower has been HHS and the Social Security Entitlement side.

Defense has always been a big segment of fed.gov spending because that's it's Raison d'être vis a vis foreign policy. Redistributing money between the states, not so much. Military Spending was 70% of the Federal Government's spending in the 50s. Now it's 20%. Which part has grown again in proportion to the Federal Government's total budget?

[roninspoon]

"Iraq and Afghanistan war costs were also mostly excluded from the budget calculations."

Probably because a large portion of the war financing, hundreds of billions worth, was coming from supplementary budgetary sources not included in the DoD budget.

Here's a graph from the same wikipedia page that yours came from, portraying the increase in total defense expenditures over the last ten years, including supplementary sources.

[montieth]

Yes and the total cost for the Iraq/Afghanistan fracas has been about $1.09 trillion to date right? That's a bit less than 1/3rd of 2009's total budget outlay.

That still doesn't satisfy the indictment of a "global military infrastructure that is bankrupting our nation". Again, we had a MUCH larger defense posture the world over with FAR of the total federal budget spent on defense in the 50s and we weren't bankrupting the nation then.

Now, for Europe, considering they have a greater amount of GDP, they certainly need to pony up some more of their own capital and move their own weight. I've been consistent on this point for years. US Maritime Preposition/Disaster/Military forward deployments dwarf their capabilities 20 fold. And that doesn't even count what they CAN deploy in a moments notice.

But all of that does not satisfy the statement that Military expenditures are bankrupting the country. Excessive spending for HHS and other programs, pork and the strangle of pallet loads of Federal CFRs and USC's is what's bankrupting the country.

[roninspoon]

Agreed. Pork spending to win votes is a huge problem, especially in defense spending. It's common practice these days for self serving legislators to promote and include pork spending on lucrative defense contracts for their states, even when people like the Secretary of Defense questions the necessity of the programs.

http://lonelyconservative.com/2009/12/2010-defense-budget-loaded-with-pork/

http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/100794269.html

http://washingtonindependent.com/74974/defense-analysts-blast-military-exemption-to-spending-freeze

Frankly though, I think it's a problem endemic to our political system, that won't be mitigated until the influence of lobbyists on legislators is reduced and term limits for same are introduced.

[montieth]

Except it's not pork if you're maintaining one of TWO fundamental programs in the US to maintain an industrial capability.

If we want to continue to build ships for our navy we have to use the shipyards and maintain the production lines. Otherwise, if we let the job force go elsewhere, don't develop in those sectors and more or less ignore things, then thats how we get into situations like we were in at the Beginning of World War II. That is, sending US troops to war in a tank that was substandard and entirely expedient because congress had decided to spend the money elsewhere.

This is what we started World War II in for our available medium tank. It was fit ONLY for training at war's start.


We were able to get M3s designed built quickly bit it was still a hamstrung and expedient vehicle. We burned men making up the difference with numbers and lack of technology in engines, suspension, armor and gun technology.

I for one don't want to see a repeat of that.

[stavner]

One problem with term limits: legislators might put in their time, then head for a lucrative private lobbying career.

How would you limit lobbyist influence?

[roninspoon]

Frankly, I'm not sure any realistic or beneficial reform, either in the way of term limits or lobbyist access, is possible. Our system is simply too self serving. The only body that could change these policies is the very body that stands to gain by the policies.

As long as we're clear that my forthcoming proposal is a fantasy grounded in my naive notions of fairness and representation, then I'll share it with you, and by extension, the internet at large.

I propose a lottery. Registered voters who are eligible for office are chosen at random, and required to serve X number of terms in political offices on both a local as well as a national scale. While in office, they are compensated equally at a basic living rate from the budget of the political office they hold. Once X number of terms have expired, their term is up and they are no longer eligible for any political office. While in office, all meetings have to be conducted according to an open meeting law, and all correspondence is public information.

[montieth]

What of various extra budgetary expenditures for other functions not included in the Budget?

How much was involved in TARP or Tarp II? More than ~$700 Billion for TARP. And TARP II was ~$350 Billion. Thats the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan right there isn't it?

Here's what I mean.



Defense isn't getting a bigger part of the pie. It's other programs.

[roninspoon]

One of the big differences between defense spending and TARP, is that TARP is being paid back, and didn't cost as much as budgeted.

[montieth]

Paid back to whom? Me and you? We're getting taxes back?

When the military spends money on a defense system they get nothing back in return? No system? No contractual support?

[conform]

Radio? There are no bones in ice cream!

[montieth]

There's no Crying In Base Ball!