Armed Services On Empty, Can't Take More Cuts: Vice Chiefs

[pphilfran]

http://defense.aol.com/2011/07/26/services-on-empty-cant-take-more-cuts-vice-chiefs/?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl10|sec3_lnk3|81519

Washington: The armed services are tired, broke and running near empty.

And if Capitol Hill looks to the Pentagon to shoulder any more of the debt burden, those forces will break, according to the vice chiefs of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and the Air Force.

During today's hearing of the House Armed Services Readiness subcommittee, each vice chief ran through the litany of shortfalls and readiness reductions each service has endured as a result of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Chiarelli ran through the bad old days of Iraq, when the service was running 15-month troop deployments to fight off the rising insurgency.

Adm. Jonathan Greenert, vice chief of naval operations, said the sea service has hit "an inflection point or tipping point" on how it will maintain its current fleet while supporting its plan to build the sea service to 313 ships.

Gen. Joseph Dunford, Marine Corps assistant commandant, said home station readiness rates have dropped so low, as a result of the high operational tempo in Afghanistan, that his troops cannot do their jobs in other parts of the world.

Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Philip Breedlove, said the "slow and steady" stress being put on the air assets, particularly its intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance fleet, has put the Air Force in the same boat as the Marine Corps.

While each service vice chief had their own set of problems, one thing they all agreed on was that service readiness cannot survive any more defense cuts.

"There is no going back," Chiarelli told the subcommittee.

Each senior officer said they would make due under the White House's plans to trim $400 billion from the Pentagon's budget over the next decade.

Any more than that $400 billion would force each service to reassess its base warfighting strategies wholesale.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff nominee Gen. Martin Dempsey said the $800 to $1 trillion cut to defense spending being discussed on the Hill would be "extremely difficult and very high risk," during his Senate confirmation hearing today.

The Marines would have to make "fundamental changes" to service requirements, according to Dunford. Going past $400 billion would "hollow" out the Air Force, Breedlove said. The Navy's entire shipbuilding strategy would have to be rewritten, Greenert claimed.

But again, Chiarelli said it best when he said that the Army simply was not ready for the onslaught brought on by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And as those wars wind down and America's military forces face new threats, the Army vice chief's message was clear: 'We do not want to go back to that again."

[JohnnyMack]

8y06NSBBRtY

[The]

http://breakthematrix.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/us_vs_world.gif

[NormanPride]

These all sound like good things to me.

[Midtowner]

The defense spending cut would pose ZERO risk if we weren't involved in wars we have no business being involved in. And the military industrial complex could make money by selling arms to the countries we'd be vacating who would now be responsible for their own defense.

[The]

These all sound like good things to me.

Wanna play Battletoads?

[soonercruiser]

As long as America is the world's last, great hope, the cost will be high to the American tax=payer.
Maybe...tell the UN to get lost the next time they ask us to help!

This is the same old worn out liberal song...the Demoncrats will once again gut the military as the first and esasiest target to hit on budget cuts....just like Clinton did during my later AF years.
GOD forbid Dems would have a serious plan to cut social programs!
:rolleyes:
And, in the end, you have to pay the price for bulking up the military when the next "Overseas Cointingency" comes around....and you have screwed the pooch on recruiting and weapons!
Duh!

"There will always be wars, and rumors of wars"!
"The poor you will always have with you....."

[soonercruiser]

The defense spending cut would pose ZERO risk if we weren't involved in wars we have no business being involved in. And the military industrial complex could make money by selling arms to the countries we'd be vacating who would now be responsible for their own defense.

Maybe when the gays are all in charge of the military, we will make "love", and not war.
Of course, then we'll all be screwed!
:D

[The]

As long as America is the world's last, great hope, the cost will be high to the American tax=payer.
Maybe...tell the UN to get lost the next time they ask us to help!

This is the same old worn out liberal song...the Demoncrats will once again gut the military as the first and esasiest target to hit on budget cuts....just like Clinton did during my later AF years.
GOD forbid Dems would have a serious plan to cut social programs!
:rolleyes:
And, in the end, you have to pay the price for bulking up the military when the next "Overseas Cointingency" comes around....and you have screwed the pooch on recruiting and weapons!
Duh!

"There will always be wars, and rumors of wars"!
"The poor you will always have with you....."


You are a Fascist. Not in the modern, "You're a Nazi!" Godwin's Law sense, but in a "your political ideology is almost 100% Fascist" sense. Like Mussolini and Franco.

14 Defining characteristics of Fascism (http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm)

[TUSooner]

Let's see, the GOPhers on the board say CUT CUT CUT and don't do anything that can be construe as a tax increase. YET... we must spend whatever it takes to be The World's Cop in every dark and God-forsaken corner of the world, and it's all Obama's fault that the armed forces are starving, STARVING I tell ya. pft

[TUSooner]

As long as America is the world's last, great hope, the cost will be high to the American tax=payer.
Maybe...tell the UN to get lost the next time they ask us to help!

This is the same old worn out liberal song...the Demoncrats will once again gut the military as the first and esasiest target to hit on budget cuts....just like Clinton did during my later AF years.
GOD forbid Dems would have a serious plan to cut social programs!
:rolleyes:
And, in the end, you have to pay the price for bulking up the military when the next "Overseas Cointingency" comes around....and you have screwed the pooch on recruiting and weapons!
Duh!

"There will always be wars, and rumors of wars"!
"The poor you will always have with you....."

Are you quoting scripture to justify a perpetual war machine while dismissing out-of-hand any sort of "social program"? If so, that's repulsive. No, it's blasphemous.

[TUSooner]

8y06NSBBRtY

You listen to that Bolshevik?!




(This post employs the rhetorical device of "irony.")

[okie52]

Let's see, the GOPhers on the board say CUT CUT CUT and don't do anything that can be construe as a tax increase. YET... we must spend whatever it takes to be The World's Cop in every dark and God-forsaken corner of the world, and it's all Obama's fault that the armed forces are starving, STARVING I tell ya. pft

I'm happy cutting the military spending in 1/2 over the next 20 years and reinstating all of the Clinton tax rates along with pushing back SS 2 years and raising the SS tax base to $140,000.

Are you good with that too?

[The]

I'm happy cutting the military spending in 1/2 over the next 20 years and reinstating all of the Clinton tax rates along with pushing back SS 2 years and raising the SS tax base to $140,000.

Are you good with that too?


Whoa, whoa, whoa... you're talking COMPROMISE there, comrade.

[okie52]

Whoa, whoa, whoa... you're talking COMPROMISE there, comrade.

Yeah, but it really is more about pragmatism...it just appears like it is a compromise.

[TUSooner]

I'm happy cutting the military spending in 1/2 over the next 20 years and reinstating all of the Clinton tax rates along with pushing back SS 2 years and raising the SS tax base to $140,000.

Are you good with that too?

I'm not "good" with anything. I just like to yell "bullsh*t" at the rug-chewing right-wing-radio zombies who predominate around here. They seem to have all of human existence boiled down to a few simple theoretical political principles that fit every situation.

[The]

Yeah, but it really is more about pragmatism...it just appears like it is a compromise.

You sir, obviously have no future in American Politics. There is nary a single Bumper Sticker-able slogan in either of your posts.

[C&CDean]

I'm not "good" with anything. I just like to yell "bullsh*t" at the rug-chewing right-wing-radio zombies who predominate around here. They seem to have all of human existence boiled down to a few simple theoretical political principles that fit every situation.

You obviously ain't been around here much lately K.

[okie52]

I'm not "good" with anything. I just like to yell "bullsh*t" at the rug-chewing right-wing-radio zombies who predominate around here. They seem to have all of human existence boiled down to a few simple theoretical political principles that fit every situation.

Certainly there are the righties living by sound bytes but, unless you are wearing blinders, there are also a large segment of posters that take their marching orders from the daily cos, et al, too. Either extreme or robotic regurgitation is useless and boring.

[okie52]

You sir, obviously have no future in American Politics. There is nary a single Bumper Sticker-able slogan in either of your posts.

Nope, couldn't get elected dog catcher.

I have upped my stays at Holiday Inns, however. That could be part of the problem.

[TUSooner]

You obviously ain't been around here much lately K.

That is an actual fact.
Traditionally though, the so-called leftists around here have lagged behind their right-wing counterparts in the absolute certainty of their righteous pronouncements, and it's that absolute certainty that makes fat & easy targets for my lazy potshots. Nonetheless, I'll keep my eyes peeled for Bolsheviks and such, just to be fair, y'know. ;)

[sappstuf]

Let's see, the GOPhers on the board say CUT CUT CUT and don't do anything that can be construe as a tax increase. YET... we must spend whatever it takes to be The World's Cop in every dark and God-forsaken corner of the world, and it's all Obama's fault that the armed forces are starving, STARVING I tell ya. pft

Can you actually point to a one specific post that says we should be in every corner of the world?

[TUSooner]

Can you actually point to a one specific post that says we should be in every corner of the world?

No; that was "hyperbole."
But we do always seem to be able to find reasons to send our troops to lots of places.

[sappstuf]

No. That was hyperbole.

And the part about the armed forces starving?

[picasso]

Let's see, the GOPhers on the board say CUT CUT CUT and don't do anything that can be construe as a tax increase. YET... we must spend whatever it takes to be The World's Cop in every dark and God-forsaken corner of the world, and it's all Obama's fault that the armed forces are starving, STARVING I tell ya. pft

I don't know many GOP types that want to police the world.

[SoonerStormchaser]

Guys, the brass isn't just blowing smoke up the Prez's *** on this...I'm living this reality every day out here...we're being stretched to our breaking point.
In the three year's I've been flying operational sorties, our funding has DROPPED 40% while our taskings have DOUBLED!
Wanna know the REAL reasons why suicides and divorces amongst the services have skyrocketed in the past five years? We keep being asked to do more with less...and it's taking its toll.

[The]

Guys, the brass isn't just blowing smoke up the Prez's *** on this...I'm living this reality every day out here...we're being stretched to our breaking point.
In the three year's I've been flying operational sorties, our funding has DROPPED 40% while our taskings have DOUBLED!
Wanna know the REAL reasons why suicides and divorces amongst the services have skyrocketed in the past five years? We keep being asked to do more with less...and it's taking its toll.


Yeah, well, so has everyone else in this recession.

[SoonerStormchaser]

Yeah, well, so has everyone else in this recession.

Ok...try doing it with ****ty lines of communication in a far away land away from your loved ones for months on end and then coming home only to be turned around and sent right back out the door a few months later. If you like that prospect, then step right up...if not, please STFU!

[Fish&Game]

Ok...try doing it with ****ty lines of communication in a far away land away from your loved ones for months on end and then coming home only to be turned around and sent right back out the door a few months later. If you like that prospect, then step right up...if not, please STFU!He couldn't handle it...and I guarantee he won't STFU!:P

[The]

Ok...try doing it with ****ty lines of communication in a far away land away from your loved ones for months on end and then coming home only to be turned around and sent right back out the door a few months later. If you like that prospect, then step right up...if not, please STFU!

Time's are tough. We spend as nearly much on our military as THE REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED.

Quit bitchin.

[Jammin']

Ok...try doing it with ****ty lines of communication in a far away land away from your loved ones for months on end and then coming home only to be turned around and sent right back out the door a few months later. If you like that prospect, then step right up...if not, please STFU!

Glad I wasn't drafted. Good luck man.

[Sooner5030]

take it down to $500 billion in 2005 dollars but more importantly someone needs to decide which capabilities we give up. Also, be an adult and explain the 'worst case scenario' costs that could come with that decision.

I don't like intervention but at least listen to the 'experts' that claim our projected forces provide stability in energy and resource markets.

[okie52]

Guys, the brass isn't just blowing smoke up the Prez's *** on this...I'm living this reality every day out here...we're being stretched to our breaking point.
In the three year's I've been flying operational sorties, our funding has DROPPED 40% while our taskings have DOUBLED!
Wanna know the REAL reasons why suicides and divorces amongst the services have skyrocketed in the past five years? We keep being asked to do more with less...and it's taking its toll.

I'm sure you are right. The idea should be to greatly reduce the military's exposure around the world.

[soonercoop1]

http://breakthematrix.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/us_vs_world.gif

So maybe the rest of the world can start protecting themselves and build their own militaries?

[Sooner5030]

also, most of this is rigged so that shutting anything down requires an immediate charge-off that greatly increases current expenses. These folks are smart.

[The]

So maybe the rest of the world can start protecting themselves and build their own militaries?


Tru Dis.

[OhU1]

Every agency head and special interest is going to have their own version of a "the sky is falling" statement to try and preserve their share of the money pie. The military is no different.

[Curly Bill]

Every agency head and special interest is going to have their own version of a "the sky is falling" statement to try and preserve their share of the money pie. The military is no different.

In all fairness the military is a little different.

[Fish&Game]

I thought Obama was gonna bring all the troops home...

[pphilfran]

Guys, the brass isn't just blowing smoke up the Prez's *** on this...I'm living this reality every day out here...we're being stretched to our breaking point.
In the three year's I've been flying operational sorties, our funding has DROPPED 40% while our taskings have DOUBLED!
Wanna know the REAL reasons why suicides and divorces amongst the services have skyrocketed in the past five years? We keep being asked to do more with less...and it's taking its toll.

Thanks for your service...

[AlboSooner]

Hopefully we will have enough guys in uniform to stop Canada from invading us.

[Theskipster]

Even after all these years I've been alive, it still blows my mind that there are a lot of Americans who believe spending money to kill people is so extremely more important than helping people or updating our infrastructure.

Yes, the military can't continue as usual with less funds, but they really don't need to continue as usual. Like no more destroying countries for oil profits that we have to police or rebuild. That would be a good start. And I bet we could do even better than that.

[sappstuf]

Hopefully we will have enough guys in uniform to stop Canada from invading us.

Doubtful. We have been attacking Libya for 4 months and can't win...

[AlboSooner]

Even after all these years I've been alive, it still blows my mind that there are a lot of Americans who believe spending money to kill people is so extremely more important than helping people or updating our infrastructure.

Yes, the military can't continue as usual with less funds, but they really don't need to continue as usual. Like no more destroying countries for oil profits that we have to police or rebuild. That would be a good start. And I bet we could do even better than that.

If we stop spending on any type of future military project, still nobody can touch us for another 200-300 years. Even if you take Nukes out of the equation. I do expect the politburo to use fear to keep the funds flowing.

[okie52]

Hopefully we will have enough guys in uniform to stop Canada from invading us.

No way. We haven't stopped millions of invaders from the south in last 30 years...

[AlboSooner]

No way. We haven't stopped millions of invaders from the south in last 30 years...

this is actually a good point. need to spend more on armed forces to stop the invaders from the south

[Curly Bill]

this is actually a good point. need to spend more on armed forces to stop the invaders from the south

We could actually turn that into a money maker. Just sell licenses.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

Ok...try doing it with ****ty lines of communication in a far away land away from your loved ones for months on end and then coming home only to be turned around and sent right back out the door a few months later. If you like that prospect, then step right up...if not, please STFU!
What exactly did you expect when you signed up?

[GKeeper316]

If we stop spending on any type of future military project, still nobody can touch us for another 200-300 years. Even if you take Nukes out of the equation. I do expect the politburo to use fear to keep the funds flowing.

thats not true... tanks and planes wear out just like any piece of machinery and must be replaced from time to time.

[sappstuf]

I posted this before in a different thread, but it didn't get any response. It is actual numbers. I would really like to hear some responses.


At the height of the Cold War we had almost 600 ships in the Navy. Today we have 285.

You say that you want to shrink the military by 50%. So that would leave us with 142 ships or roughly 70 ships to protect each coast... That is, of course, without projecting any force abroad.

What if things went bad in the Straits of Hormuz? It would take a carrier battle group months to get there and by the time they did the world economy would be in turmoil.. Unless you want to forward deploy a carrier battle group.. Now you will have 60 ships to protect the entire west coast to stay within your 50% cut.

15%(I could be off by a little) of the ships would probably be in the docks for repair and maintenance so knock 20 ships off that 142 down to 122. So 60 ships to protect each coast. Deploy a single carrier battle group and you are down to 50 of which two would probably be aircraft carriers.

Are you comfortable with that and extending that to the next 40 years?

[OU_Sooners75]

Even after all these years I've been alive, it still blows my mind that there are a lot of Americans who believe spending money to kill people is so extremely more important than helping people or updating our infrastructure.

Yes, the military can't continue as usual with less funds, but they really don't need to continue as usual. Like no more destroying countries for oil profits that we have to police or rebuild. That would be a good start. And I bet we could do even better than that.

So you are saying we should invade Iran?

[Jammin']

I posted this before in a different thread, but it didn't get any response. It is actual numbers. I would really like to hear some responses.


At the height of the Cold War we had almost 600 ships in the Navy. Today we have 285.

You say that you want to shrink the military by 50%. So that would leave us with 142 ships or roughly 70 ships to protect each coast... That is, of course, without projecting any force abroad.

What if things went bad in the Straits of Hormuz? It would take a carrier battle group months to get there and by the time they did the world economy would be in turmoil.. Unless you want to forward deploy a carrier battle group.. Now you will have 60 ships to protect the entire west coast to stay within your 50% cut.

15%(I could be off by a little) of the ships would probably be in the docks for repair and maintenance so knock 20 ships off that 142 down to 122. So 60 ships to protect each coast. Deploy a single carrier battle group and you are down to 50 of which two would probably be aircraft carriers.

Are you comfortable with that and extending that to the next 40 years?

I read this when you first posted it and it certainly made me think. Question: how many military bases do we have on or near the coasts? I assume a lot but don't have a clue.

[OhU1]

Cutback the military, food stamps, headstart, mortgage interest deduction, and everything else. No sacred cows. It's a big s*** sandwich and everyone has to take a bite.

While we're at it, make the 51% of people who pay NO taxes pay something, anything. I hear a lot about making the "rich" (anyone who is required to wear a tie to work) pay their "fair share". You live in this country and have a stake in its future you should contribute something. Pay no taxes? Then your goldbrick a** shouldn't get to vote to impose taxes on those who do.

[sappstuf]

I read this when you first posted it and it certainly made me think. Question: how many military bases do we have on or near the coasts? I assume a lot but don't have a clue.

If you are talking about ships and submarines, you really only have two on the west coast, San Diego and the Bangor Washington area. I really don't know how you could close either one of them. There are more on the east coast, Jacksonville FL, Kings Bay GA, Norfolk VA, and Groton CT.

Then you have a combination of Naval Air Stations, Seabee bases and training areas that fill in most of the rest.

Here is a map of Navy bases:

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/bases/base-map-flat-2004s.gif

[AlboSooner]

I do hope that if they cut military spending, they cut those projects that try to keep us five steps ahead of the aliens, and not cut the benefits of servicemen, and veterans.

[okie52]

Sapp-

I used to believe we were 10-1vs the next largest military...but it appears we are at about 6-1 vs China. Chinas economy will eventually pass the US in the
30 years so you can expect their military to rival ours in that time.

I believe that our economy is our strength (or any nations) and we must focus our investments there. I don't know what our ability to project force means to our economy...it doesn't seem like other countries buy our goods because we have the baddest military in the world. It probably means something to the Saudis but my wish is to be energy independent so we aren't at their bidding.

I do know that we cannot sustain half of the worlds military expenditures.

[Sooner5030]

caveat - I'm for cutting spending to $500 billion in 2005 dollars

ratio spending does not equal ratio in capabilities. Our folks and products are extremely expensive when compared to most of those countries.

use the ratio of military spending % of GDP to get a better comparison.

[Theskipster]

So you are saying we should invade Iran?

Iran never threatened to flood the oil markets like Saddam Hussein did.

Now if you wanted to go after a country that we were sure of funding terrorism against the US and we had absolutely no doubts were trying to build nuclear weapons, then yes we should have gone after Iran instead of Iraq.

But Iran wasn't threatening to hurt Halliburton's profits so they were a much less important target to spend billions on to go to war with.

[diverdog]

Guys, the brass isn't just blowing smoke up the Prez's *** on this...I'm living this reality every day out here...we're being stretched to our breaking point.
In the three year's I've been flying operational sorties, our funding has DROPPED 40% while our taskings have DOUBLED!
Wanna know the REAL reasons why suicides and divorces amongst the services have skyrocketed in the past five years? We keep being asked to do more with less...and it's taking its toll.

Until the American people start to sacrifice for these wars by paying more in taxes then you guys are SOL.

[sappstuf]

Sapp-

I used to believe we were 10-1vs the next largest military...but it appears we are at about 6-1 vs China. Chinas economy will eventually pass the US in the
30 years so you can expect their military to rival ours in that time.

I believe that our economy is our strength (or any nations) and we must focus our investments there. I don't know what our ability to project force means to our economy...it doesn't seem like other countries buy our goods because we have the baddest military in the world. It probably means something to the Saudis but my wish is to be energy independent so we aren't at their bidding.

I do know that we cannot sustain half of the worlds military expenditures.

Okie,

China is under reporting their military spending.. Many people think they are spending the same percentage of GDP on the military and Russia isn't far behind. You are right that in 30 years they could rival ours.

Since I am being lazy, I will give you the Wiki version of force projection..


Power projection (or force projection) is a term used in military and political science to refer to the capacity of a state to conduct expeditionary warfare, i.e. to intimidate other nations and implement policy by means of force, or the threat thereof, in an area distant from its own territory. This ability is a crucial element of a state's power in international relations.

China and the Spratly Islands concern me...


Found in the middle of major shipping lanes and having abundant commercial fishing possibilities, the Spratly Islands trigger human conflict for an even greater reason: untapped oil, gas and mineral reserves discovered far below the surface of these remote islands.

Geological estimates put the regions oil and gas reserves at 25-billion tons, far outweighing the combined reserves currently found in Kuwait and Nigeria.

Here is a google search of the Spratly Islands narrowed down to the past two weeks.

http://www.google.com/#q=china+spratly+islands&hl=en&prmd=ivnsu&source=lnt&tbs=qdr:w&sa=X&ei=hrEwTsuyGeeNsQKI9Ol2&sqi=2&ved=0CAkQpwUoAw&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=f13c9bd5e767d03e&biw=1639&bih=817

Here is a map of China's absurd claims on the territorial waters..

http://i1009.photobucket.com/albums/af217/cris46/China-claims-Paracel-Spratly-Island.jpg

If shipping were disrupted in that area, the world economy would flail..

Besides that, you have a growing superpower making absurd claims on territorial waters in the search for oil. Where have we heard that before..... It is how wars start.

Most of our naval fleet is on the east coast, probably because WW2. If it were me, I would be moving assets over to the west coast.

[okie52]

Sapp-

I've got no problem with maintaining a military that advances the economic interests of the US. I view most of our involvement in the ME as unnecessary if the US wOuld ever adopt a rational energy policy.

China certainly is only projecting an economic force right now. Yet they are doing it without any real teeth militarily because the US can't really afford to cross them because they own us.

[diverdog]

Sapp-

I've got no problem with maintaining a military that advances the economic interests of the US. I view most of our involvement in the ME as unnecessary if the US wOuld ever adopt a rational energy policy.

China certainly is only projecting an economic force right now. Yet they are doing it without any real teeth militarily because the US can't really afford to cross them because they own us.

I bet if we spent two years of military budgets on better alternatives to gas the ME becomes a non issue for us.

[Theskipster]

Sapp-

I've got no problem with maintaining a military that advances the economic interests of the US. I view most of our involvement in the ME as unnecessary if the US wOuld ever adopt a rational energy policy.

China certainly is only projecting an economic force right now. Yet they are doing it without any real teeth militarily because the US can't really afford to cross them because they own us.

How do they own us?

[okie52]

I bet if we spent two years of military budgets on better alternatives to gas the ME becomes a non issue for us.

We don't have to spend 1.5 trillion to "hopefully" find better alternatives to foreign oil...he11 I'll bet the world has easily dOne that over the last 30 years.
We just need to develop our own resources.

Still think Obama is still going to get a new nuke online in the next 5 years?

[okie52]

How do they own us?

Ummmm...you haven't noticed our debt to China?

[OU_Sooners75]

Iran never threatened to flood the oil markets like Saddam Hussein did.

Now if you wanted to go after a country that we were sure of funding terrorism against the US and we had absolutely no doubts were trying to build nuclear weapons, then yes we should have gone after Iran instead of Iraq.

But Iran wasn't threatening to hurt Halliburton's profits so they were a much less important target to spend billions on to go to war with.

If I was on something other than an iPod, I would post a picture for you... Since I can't I'll just do it this way:

/FACEPALM

[OU_Sooners75]

What is out national debt vs our GDP?

For some reason google doesn't want to work for me on this damn iPod.

[Sooner5030]

which national debt.....the one outstanding to the public or the one that includes the securities the SSA holds also?

[SanJoaquinSooner]

What is out national debt vs our GDP?

For some reason google doesn't want to work for me on this damn iPod.

something like 90%.

[Sooner5030]

yeah....i'd say closer to 100%. Debt is exact while GDP is a statistical inference based on small samples of a large population.

[sooneron]

I believe everything the military tells me is the gospel.


Uh huh, feel free to run with that.

[Sooner5030]

individually i'd bet each chief recognizes the need to cut deeply.....the first to admit this will sacrifice their service first though.

procurement is spread around the country and over a number of the years so that any gain in current spending cuts is not worth the loss to each district.....at least to the pols. People can be cut because there is no immediate relationship between the pool of lost jobs to any specific district.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

Until the American people start to sacrifice for these wars by paying more in taxes then you guys are SOL.
Because these wars are so extremely beneficial on the homefront, they are clearly worth sacrifice.

[C&CDean]

Because these wars are so extremely beneficial on the homefront, they are clearly worth sacrifice.

Yeah, since they give dumb ****ers from South Carolina an opportunity to have a job. And by dumb ****ers from South Carolina I mean military men who are a lot smarter than you.

[Curly Bill]

Uh huh, feel free to run with that.

:confused:

Why did you pick me to try and make some point you must have?

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

Yeah, since they give dumb ****ers from South Carolina an opportunity to have a job. And by dumb ****ers from South Carolina I mean military men who are a lot smarter than you.
An opportunity with taxpayer money that would otherwise find itself creating jobs in the private sector. Thought you right wingers were against big government anyway? Nice little ad hominem you threw in there at the end, smart military man.

[sappstuf]

Sapp-

I've got no problem with maintaining a military that advances the economic interests of the US. I view most of our involvement in the ME as unnecessary if the US wOuld ever adopt a rational energy policy.

China certainly is only projecting an economic force right now. Yet they are doing it without any real teeth militarily because the US can't really afford to cross them because they own us.

Globally that is true, but close to home they are certainly projecting military force.

This topic sounds like something we should discuss over lunch... ;)

[okie52]

An opportunity with taxpayer money that would otherwise find itself creating jobs in the private sector. Thought you right wingers were against big government anyway? Nice little ad hominem you threw in there at the end, smart military man.

Let me guess...you are against Boeing moving a lot of jobs to SC because it kicks the unions azz.

[sooneron]

:confused:

Why did you pick me to try and make some point you must have?

Because I find it amusing that you immediately excuse the fire alarm ringing of the pentagon peeps because they are more noble or something. LIke they don't have a vested interest (their jobs and fishing trips to Cabo ala Lockheed) in skeering the public into not cutting ANY funding. There's a ****load of fat in that budget that could be trimmed and not a single soldier that is serving would feel the effects of it.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

Let me guess...you are against Boeing moving a lot of jobs to SC because it kicks the unions azz.
Not sure how you got that out of my previous post which was endorsing free market job creation. Unions are inefficient, monopolistic and a hindrance to growth and progress for workers.

[Curly Bill]

Because I find it amusing that you immediately excuse the fire alarm ringing of the pentagon peeps because they are more noble or something. LIke they don't have a vested interest (their jobs and fishing trips to Cabo ala Lockheed) in skeering the public into not cutting ANY funding. There's a ****load of fat in that budget that could be trimmed and not a single soldier that is serving would feel the effects of it.

I know there's waste in the military. But I'm not with the "they're just another agency/department" dealio either. They're really a little more than that.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

I know there's waste in the military. But I'm not with the "they're just another agency/department" dealio either. They're really a little more than that.
More than that...several agencies and departments? Please enlighten us common folk on the difference between a government department/agency and a government department/agency.

[soonercruiser]

:confused:

Why did you pick me to try and make some point you must have?

Because it's his "calling" in his life!
It just happens to be you today.....:O

[Curly Bill]

More than that...several agencies and departments? Please enlighten us common folk on the difference between a government department/agency and a government department/agency.

I would if I gave a F what you thought about anything. Of all the peeps on here you might be the one I care least about enlightening on anything. :D

[okie52]

Not sure how you got that out of my previous post which was endorsing free market job creation. Unions are inefficient, monopolistic and a hindrance to growth and progress for workers.

Let me apologize for stereotyping you. I applaud your stance.

[Memtig14]

Maybe when the gays are all in charge of the military, we will make "love", and not war.
Of course, then we'll all be screwed!
:D

Yep......and you know where.

[sooneron]

Because it's his "calling" in his life!
It just happens to be you today.....:O

Srsly, you just might be dumber than a box of hair.

[sooneron]

I know there's waste in the military. But I'm not with the "they're just another agency/department" dealio either. They're really a little more than that.

They are pretty much an agency that get whatever they want and they will wave the flag to do it. They are no different than Barney Frank screaming Financial Fire back in 08. They just know that they will eventually get their bread buttered. To think otherwise is naive. The sad thing is, if the pentagon would receive any cuts, who would feel the brunt of it? The boots on the ground, Why? That way they could justify all of the atrocities suffered due to cuts in their checkbook. Yet, some ridiculous weapons program that is untested and/ or out of date would go on getting the funds because a four star got a hummer in the champagne lounge.

[sappstuf]

They are pretty much an agency that get whatever they want and they will wave the flag to do it. They are no different than Barney Frank screaming Financial Fire back in 08. They just know that they will eventually get their bread buttered. To think otherwise is naive. The sad thing is, if the pentagon would receive any cuts, who would feel the brunt of it? The boots on the ground, Why? That way they could justify all of the atrocities suffered due to cuts in their checkbook. Yet, some ridiculous weapons program that is untested and/ or out of date would go on getting the funds because a four star got a hummer in the champagne lounge.

I've been to that bar in Thailand. You don't need to be a four star...

[sooneron]

I've been to that bar in Thailand. You don't need to be a four star...

Yeah, but I'm talking about getting a hummer from a chick...:texan:

[sappstuf]

Yeah, but I'm talking about getting a hummer from a chick...:texan:

Beware the adam's apple!

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i100/partypictures_photos/bc1709/bc7.jpg

[diverdog]

Beware the adam's apple!

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i100/partypictures_photos/bc1709/bc7.jpg

Did you learn the hard way? I know you sailor boys are none to picky.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

I would if I gave a F what you thought about anything. Of all the peeps on here you might be the one I care least about enlightening on anything. :D
You just don't have an answer, but thats okay. Keep living in denial I suppose.

[sappstuf]

Did you learn the hard way? I know you sailor boys are none to picky.

Why should I have to learn it the hard way, when I can watch Marines make the same mistake over and over? ;)

Never, and I mean NEVER, start drinking before 5 in the afternoon and then try to find a girl at 11 that night in Thailand...

[soonercruiser]

More than that...several agencies and departments? Please enlighten us common folk on the difference between a government department/agency and a government department/agency.

Please read the Constitution....it gives you a hint on the priorities set by the Founding Fathers. :rolleyes:

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

Please read the Constitution....it gives you a hint on the priorities set by the Founding Fathers. :rolleyes:


The Congress shall have Power To declare war
Lets start with this priority which has been completely ignored as of late

[diverdog]

Why should I have to learn it the hard way, when I can watch Marines make the same mistake over and over? ;)

Never, and I mean NEVER, start drinking before 5 in the afternoon and then try to find a girl at 11 that night in Thailand...

LOL

Never made it to Thailand. The PI was as far as I got.

[sappstuf]

LOL

Never made it to Thailand. The PI was as far as I got.

I probably liked PI better for a variety of reasons... Always had a good time there.

[GKeeper316]

I've been to that bar in Thailand. You don't need to be a four star...

ya 1 stripe and 20 bucks is enough. oorah

[GKeeper316]

Please read the Constitution....it gives you a hint on the priorities set by the Founding Fathers. :rolleyes:

please read the 14th amendment.

[BU BEAR]

http://breakthematrix.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/us_vs_world.gif

Not to sound skeptical of the chart, but I know Canada spends money on its military. Where is Canada's spending?

[soonercruiser]

Not to sound skeptical of the chart, but I know Canada spends money on its military. Where is Canada's spending?

Amounts less than $100,000 not reported!
:D

(where's the sarcasm emoticon?)

[GottaHavePride]

I'm going to drop a random thought in here, and I don't know if anyone has said it yet, 'cause I'm not going back to read three pages of this.

You can't cut spending where there isn't any. Cutting a few million dollars here and there out of arts, social, and education programs does absolutely nothing to offset the 680 BILLION dollars we're spending on the DOD every year.

Sure, Medicare and Social Security are huge albatrosses around our necks, too. But spending cuts have to come from somewhere there IS money to be cut.

[Okla-homey]

Ok...try doing it with ****ty lines of communication in a far away land away from your loved ones for months on end and then coming home only to be turned around and sent right back out the door a few months later. If you like that prospect, then step right up...if not, please STFU!

You volunteered right? And you wanted AWACS right? STFU and do your damned job. Professionals don't bitch. Especially commissioned ones. And if you don't like it, walk when your commitment is up. You can always sell shoes.

[BU BEAR]

I'm going to drop a random thought in here, and I don't know if anyone has said it yet, 'cause I'm not going back to read three pages of this.

You can't cut spending where there isn't any. Cutting a few million dollars here and there out of arts, social, and education programs does absolutely nothing to offset the 680 BILLION dollars we're spending on the DOD every year.

Sure, Medicare and Social Security are huge albatrosses around our necks, too. But spending cuts have to come from somewhere there IS money to be cut.


1. Defense is the primary role of government, funding the arts and transferring wealth to the old, retired, sick, poor, and out-of-work are not the government's reason for existence.

2. Cuts should be made to those areas that are non-public goods before making cuts to public goods like defense and highway construction.

3. While some may believe that it does not make a difference when you cut the arts, public broadcasting, etc...; it does in deed make a difference. It trims the government, gets rid of the lobbyists who perpetuate spending on these non-essential, non-public goods, and frees up money going forward (even if you do not think it is that much).

Regarding not making a difference, I am reminded of a story. A boy was walking along a sea shore that was covered in thousands of starfish. The boy was throwing the starfish back into the ocean as the sun rose in the East and was starting to heat up the sands of the beach. Time was short for the heat would soon kill the starfish. A grown man told the boy, "Son, you are just wasting your time with these starfish. You cannot possibly make a difference." The boy said to the man, "I can make a difference for this one" and he threw another starfish into the ocean.

And that is how we can make a difference in our nation's future by cutting even those programs on which we do not spend much money.

[CrimsonKel]

Canada's amazing fighter airplane force consists of 80 or so F-18s when last I heard.

[Chuck Bao]

Beware the adam's apple!

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i100/partypictures_photos/bc1709/bc7.jpg

Sappstuf, you made me lose focusness with that photo. I didn't see any adam's apple so I guess I am good to go.

Actually, I have no idea where the Pump Station is. I am not very good at reading Thai with the heads, but that is a transliteration.

Besides that, I suggest that we consolidate all of our European, Korean and Japanese military bases into one in Taiwan and really **** China off. Did they really think the worst we could do would be for President Obama to meet with the Dalai Lama?

What country has a problem with the Dalai Lama? China.

[diverdog]

1. Defense is the primary role of government, funding the arts and transferring wealth to the old, retired, sick, poor, and out-of-work are not the government's reason for existence.

2. Cuts should be made to those areas that are non-public goods before making cuts to public goods like defense and highway construction.

3. While some may believe that it does not make a difference when you cut the arts, public broadcasting, etc...; it does in deed make a difference. It trims the government, gets rid of the lobbyists who perpetuate spending on these non-essential, non-public goods, and frees up money going forward (even if you do not think it is that much).

Regarding not making a difference, I am reminded of a story. A boy was walking along a sea shore that was covered in thousands of starfish. The boy was throwing the starfish back into the ocean as the sun rose in the East and was starting to heat up the sands of the beach. Time was short for the heat would soon kill the starfish. A grown man told the boy, "Son, you are just wasting your time with these starfish. You cannot possibly make a difference." The boy said to the man, "I can make a difference for this one" and he threw another starfish into the ocean.

And that is how we can make a difference in our nation's future by cutting even those programs on which we do not spend much money.

Man you are naive if you do not think there are a bunch of lobbyist for the defense industry running around DC.

As to your first part read the Constitution:


We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

[Caboose]

As to your first part read the Constitution:

Provide vs promote. Pretty big difference. I am betting the framers understood the meanings of the words they used.

And where did BU Bear indicate he didn't think there were defense industry lobbyists in DC?

[BU BEAR]

Man you are naive if you do not think there are a bunch of lobbyist for the defense industry running around DC.

As to your first part read the Constitution:

1. I know that the defense industry has lobbyists. Dont be so condescending.

2. Until recently in our nation's history, "Promoting the general welfare" did not mean providing welfare. Welfare (or National Socialism projects) became popular during and after the FDR administration. Strangely enough, also under FDR is when these programs' passed Constitutional muster. Of course, he engaged in some level of political thuggery to get his way... threatening to pack the Court if one or two of the Justices did not change their opinion. Hence, came the saying "A switch in time saved nine (justices on the Court)."

If you want to lecture me, I am fine to listen to you. But, try to not be so condescending and arrogant. I will try to return the favor.

[sappstuf]

Sappstuf, you made me lose focusness with that photo. I didn't see any adam's apple so I guess I am good to go.

Actually, I have no idea where the Pump Station is. I am not very good at reading Thai with the heads, but that is a transliteration.

Besides that, I suggest that we consolidate all of our European, Korean and Japanese military bases into one in Taiwan and really **** China off. Did they really think the worst we could do would be for President Obama to meet with the Dalai Lama?

What country has a problem with the Dalai Lama? China.

Remember when Obama made the Dalai Lama leave the White House through the back door? Classy.

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/dalai-lama-white-house-back-door1-2010.jpg

That picture is from Pattaya.. It's hard to see the adam's apple when they are underneath the bar... ;)

[pphilfran]

Remember when Obama made the Dalai Lama leave the White House through the back door? Classy.

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/dalai-lama-white-house-back-door1-2010.jpg

That picture is from Pattaya.. It's hard to see the adam's apple when they are underneath the bar... ;)

Please tell me that is not real...

[sappstuf]

Please tell me that is not real...

It's real, from the visit last year.

It's just a rumor I heard, but I think they asked him to carry a bag on the way out... ;)

[soonercruiser]

I'm going to drop a random thought in here, and I don't know if anyone has said it yet, 'cause I'm not going back to read three pages of this.

You can't cut spending where there isn't any. Cutting a few million dollars here and there out of arts, social, and education programs does absolutely nothing to offset the 680 BILLION dollars we're spending on the DOD every year.

Sure, Medicare and Social Security are huge albatrosses around our necks, too. But spending cuts have to come from somewhere there IS money to be cut.

Please forward this post to Congress and the WH!
:(

[Chuck Bao]

It's real, from the visit last year.

It's just a rumor I heard, but I think they asked him to carry a bag on the way out... ;)

The old winky face is not gonna help you out here because that joke stinks. That is a very unfortunate pic and I guess the money shot was captured with a long, zoom lens. Honestly, it does infuriate me that the White House staff would allow a world-wide recognized religious leader to be leaving the White House in such a manner. President Obama needs to fire a few people over that.

[diverdog]

1. I know that the defense industry has lobbyists. Dont be so condescending.

2. Until recently in our nation's history, "Promoting the general welfare" did not mean providing welfare. Welfare (or National Socialism projects) became popular during and after the FDR administration. Strangely enough, also under FDR is when these programs' passed Constitutional muster. Of course, he engaged in some level of political thuggery to get his way... threatening to pack the Court if one or two of the Justices did not change their opinion. Hence, came the saying "A switch in time saved nine (justices on the Court)."

If you want to lecture me, I am fine to listen to you. But, try to not be so condescending and arrogant. I will try to return the favor.

If you are going to sit here and defend defense spending and say it can't or shouldn't be cut then I am going after you.

[C&CDean]

I went to an open house today at the 45th Infantry Divisions National Guard joint in Norman at I-35 and Tecumseh. One of my kids is working there full time now. We had burgers, dogs, chips, etc., took a tour of the maintenance shop and stuff. Very nice.

If you wanna cut the spending for that, blow me. Cut the spending on abortions, art, Obama's old lady trips to Casablanca to see Casablanca, welfare, foodstamps, trips to paint apples on school house walls by the prez himself, more welfare, more abortions, and General ****ing Motors. Chevies suck anyway and are commie rides.

[diverdog]

I went to an open house today at the 45th Infantry Divisions National Guard joint in Norman at I-35 and Tecumseh. One of my kids is working there full time now. We had burgers, dogs, chips, etc., took a tour of the maintenance shop and stuff. Very nice.

If you wanna cut the spending for that, blow me. Cut the spending on abortions, art, Obama's old lady trips to Casablanca to see Casablanca, welfare, foodstamps, trips to paint apples on school house walls by the prez himself, more welfare, more abortions, and General ****ing Motors. Chevies suck anyway and are commie rides.

Dean there is not even $50 billion in all that. I have spent my whole life around the military, my dad is a retired O6, BIL is a Lt Col, FIL a full bird, I was an E6 before getting hurt and on my way to OCS. Almost everyone in my family has or is serving and I telling you we can cut defense spending and not hurt our readiness. We do not need $2 billion dollar aircraft to fight guys in caves. Our military is bankrupting us and it needs to be cut. If not then you and I need to pay higher taxes.

[C&CDean]

Dean there is not even $50 billion in all that. I have spent my whole life around the military, my dad is a retired O6, BIL is a Lt Col, FIL a full bird, I was an E6 before getting hurt and on my way to OCS. Almost everyone in my family has or is serving and I telling you we can cut defense spending and not hurt our readiness. We do not need $2 billion dollar aircraft to fight guys in caves. Our military is bankrupting us and it needs to be cut. If not then you and I need to pay higher taxes.

Drugs. Get off them. Welfare in this country alone could fund a couple dozen of those $2B bombers. You must be the angry ex-military guy who got a shaft somewhere.

If you wanna cut defense spending, how about making them go back to C-Rats? The kid brought home some of the new MREs, with the self-heating water bag, veggie menu, etc. What a waste of taxpaying $$. Beanie Weanies, just like the real men ate.

[sappstuf]

The old winky face is not gonna help you out here because that joke stinks. That is a very unfortunate pic and I guess the money shot was captured with a long, zoom lens. Honestly, it does infuriate me that the White House staff would allow a world-wide recognized religious leader to be leaving the White House in such a manner. President Obama needs to fire a few people over that.

I think we know where Obama's loyalties lie....

http://biggovernment.com/files/2010/04/obama-bow.jpg

[GottaHavePride]

1. Defense is the primary role of government, funding the arts and transferring wealth to the old, retired, sick, poor, and out-of-work are not the government's reason for existence.

2. Cuts should be made to those areas that are non-public goods before making cuts to public goods like defense and highway construction.

3. While some may believe that it does not make a difference when you cut the arts, public broadcasting, etc...; it does in deed make a difference. It trims the government, gets rid of the lobbyists who perpetuate spending on these non-essential, non-public goods, and frees up money going forward (even if you do not think it is that much).

Regarding not making a difference, I am reminded of a story. A boy was walking along a sea shore that was covered in thousands of starfish. The boy was throwing the starfish back into the ocean as the sun rose in the East and was starting to heat up the sands of the beach. Time was short for the heat would soon kill the starfish. A grown man told the boy, "Son, you are just wasting your time with these starfish. You cannot possibly make a difference." The boy said to the man, "I can make a difference for this one" and he threw another starfish into the ocean.

And that is how we can make a difference in our nation's future by cutting even those programs on which we do not spend much money.

There's a lot of things that can be cut, yes, but why the hate for art? To paraphrase Winston Churchill, if we eliminate all sources of culture, then what the **** is the military fighting to protect?

[BU BEAR]

There's a lot of things that can be cut, yes, but why the hate for art? To paraphrase Winston Churchill, if we eliminate all sources of culture, then what the **** is the military fighting to protect?

I dont hate art. But, it is not the place of government to fund art.

[GKeeper316]

I dont hate art. But, it is not the place of government to fund art.

lol

[soonercruiser]

I dont hate art. But, it is not the place of government to fund art.

You mean like the Crucifix in a jar of urine?
:mad:

[diverdog]

Drugs. Get off them. Welfare in this country alone could fund a couple dozen of those $2B bombers. You must be the angry ex-military guy who got a shaft somewhere.

If you wanna cut defense spending, how about making them go back to C-Rats? The kid brought home some of the new MREs, with the self-heating water bag, veggie menu, etc. What a waste of taxpaying $$. Beanie Weanies, just like the real men ate.

First of don't be such a dick saying I am a disgruntled vet. I am not.

I have no problem throwing addicts of ssi. But I also know we can cut a ton from dod. Altus would be a good start.

[Sooner5030]

http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/charts/2011/defense-entitlement-spending-600.jpg

I'm all for cutting defense to $500 billion in 2005 dollars but lets not act like it is the only or even the biggest problem.

This country used to borrow money only in the event of war. Now it would have to borrow money even if the DoD didn't exist.

[diverdog]

http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/charts/2011/defense-entitlement-spending-600.jpg

I'm all for cutting defense to $500 billion in 2005 dollars but lets not act like it is the only or even the biggest problem.

This country used to borrow money only in the event of war. Now it would have to borrow money even if the DoD didn't exist.

Everything on that chart needs to be reworked. But lets not forget people have paid for SS and Medicare. We have not paid for the massive increase in defense spending because of the wars.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

Drugs. Get off them. Welfare in this country alone could fund a couple dozen of those $2B bombers. You must be the angry ex-military guy who got a shaft somewhere.

If you wanna cut defense spending, how about making them go back to C-Rats? The kid brought home some of the new MREs, with the self-heating water bag, veggie menu, etc. What a waste of taxpaying $$. Beanie Weanies, just like the real men ate.
And of course our priorities should be:
1. kill the poor in far off lands
2. help the poor at home

Look, I'm not saying that the welfare system isn't abused, but there are people who genuinely need it to stay alive and they don't just sit around and collect a check each month. I agree that the system should be reworked and streamlined in many ways (like a maximum # of years/months for payments) but we shouldn't be building B2s to flatten a few caves or shantys before we make a minimal effort to assist those less fortunate.

[BU BEAR]

Everything on that chart needs to be reworked. But lets not forget people have paid for SS and Medicare. We have not paid for the massive increase in defense spending because of the wars.

Actually, what people have paid for is other people's Social Security and other people's Medicare. Some folks may have thought they were paying into their own account, but you and I have no proprietary right to a Social Security account or the money that we pay to the government under Social Security and Medicare withholding. They are wealth transfer programs today and remain wealth transfer program without regard to the way that they were originally pitched to the American public.

This is all the more reason to seriously reform these programs and that probably means making substantial cuts to the programs and setting more restrictive eligibility requirements. Of course, I would not mind seeing the programs phased out or privatized over 10-15 years.

[The Profit]

Drugs. Get off them. Welfare in this country alone could fund a couple dozen of those $2B bombers. You must be the angry ex-military guy who got a shaft somewhere.

If you wanna cut defense spending, how about making them go back to C-Rats? The kid brought home some of the new MREs, with the self-heating water bag, veggie menu, etc. What a waste of taxpaying $$. Beanie Weanies, just like the real men ate.




You miss the point entirely. We don't need dozens more B2 bombers. We have more frigging weapons than we need. What we need to do is bring the military back to the point it was prior to WWII. There is no cold war. Its over. We won.

Its time for the weapons industry to learn how to construct infrastructure.

[picasso]

You miss the point entirely. We don't need dozens more B2 bombers. We have more frigging weapons than we need. What we need to do is bring the military back to the point it was prior to WWII. There is no cold war. Its over. We won.

Its time for the weapons industry to learn how to construct infrastructure.

We need to build bigger and better things so we'll never have to use them.

[The Profit]

We need to build bigger and better things so we'll never have to use them.




Doesn't it make a helluva lot more sense to build bigger and better things that we can use every day?

[picasso]

Doesn't it make a helluva lot more sense to build bigger and better things that we can use every day?

Not if the guy across the ocean is building something bigger and better. Have you ever had a few millions folks depending on you to protect them?

[BU BEAR]

Doesn't it make a helluva lot more sense to build bigger and better things that we can use every day?

How does subsidizing another person's retirement (non- or post-productivity) through Medicare and Social Security help us to build bigger and better things that we can use every day?

[The Profit]

Not if the guy across the ocean is building something bigger and better. Have you ever had a few millions folks depending on you to protect them?




You are drinking the friggin kool aid. There is no one across the ocean building something bigger and better. Take a look at what China and Russia are spending on their military versus what we are spending, and then come back and debate with me.

[pphilfran]

Keep after it Profit...

[The Profit]

How does subsidizing another person's retirement (non- or post-productivity) through Medicare and Social Security help us to build bigger and better things that we can use every day?




Social Security has worked well for more than 50 years. It works so well that government has constantly borrowed from its account since the mid-1960's. I agree with you on medicare. We should scrap it for single-payer national health care.

[soonercruiser]

You miss the point entirely. We don't need dozens more B2 bombers. We have more frigging weapons than we need. What we need to do is bring the military back to the point it was prior to WWII. There is no cold war. Its over. We won.


Now here's a statement showing genius!
The next Pearl Harbor will be our last, as a great nation!

[Sooner5030]

US spends about 4.6% of GDP on defense

others:

China 2.2%
Russia 4.4%
Israel 6.3%

I'm all for cuts in defense to $500 billion but at least I admit there is a risk of some implicit/indirect costs increases. How much will the price of oil change without our projection capabilities? Will spin-offs from war technologies stop?

[BU BEAR]

Social Security has worked well for more than 50 years. It works so well that government has constantly borrowed from its account since the mid-1960's. I agree with you on medicare. We should scrap it for single-payer national health care.

But, you are not telling me how it helps to build anything that the nation puts to daily use. Social Security and Medicare are huge entitlements that represent outlays of about $1.5 Trillion. While the individuals who receive the benefits obviously get something out of these programs, I am not sure that they represent a national benefit. They certainly do not result in the building or manufacture of useful public goods.

[soonercruiser]

Doesn't it make a helluva lot more sense to build bigger and better things that we can use every day?

Like Amtrak???
Not "use" evey day; but, "lose" every day!

But, your premise sounds good.
Although actually, that is what "defense" has done. Defense research and applications, like NASA, have produce many inventions and technical advances that have improved American lives and productivity.

BTW - for many years, the "news" has been repleat with reporting of how much more people get out of SSI and Medicare than they actually pay in.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

Not if the guy across the ocean is building something bigger and better. Have you ever had a few millions folks depending on you to protect them?
http://www.globalfirepower.com/navy-ships.asp
http://www.globalfirepower.com/aircraft-total.asp

Not only is everything we build bigger and better, we have more of it. We have as many supercarriers as the rest of the world has of any time carrier combined. I can understand the need to keep the Navy and Air Force relatively near what they are currently at, but ground forces can really be cut down. We aren't facing symmetric threats, if for some reason we did our navy/air force would be able to obliterate any invading force before it came remotely close to our shores. Then again I guess we need 10,000 tanks so we can be prepared to invade Canada.

[NormanPride]

Like highways and digital infrastructure, you boob. :)

EDIT: good point about the defense inventions. R&D is a lifeline that we cannot give up.

[pphilfran]

US spends about 4.6% of GDP on defense

others:

China 2.2%
Russia 4.4%
Israel 6.3%

I'm all for cuts in defense to $500 billion but at least I admit there is a risk of some implicit/indirect costs increases. How much will the price of oil change without our projection capabilities? Will spin-offs from war technologies stop?

Good, close number on US cost...not sure about the others...I will take your word on it...

[The Profit]

Like Amtrak???
Not "use" evey day; but, "lose" every day!




I often try to ignore you because you are nuttier than a friggin fruitcake, but I will take the bait on your statement. Amtrak actually makes money in the NE corridor, and could make money on other routes as well with high-speed rail. For instance, if you could take take the train from downtown Houston to downtown Dallas in one hour, the train would be full. Same goes for downtown St. Louis to downtown Chicago.

How much have we lost building missiles that were obsolete before they were even finished?

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

US spends about 4.6% of GDP on defense

others:

China 2.2%
Russia 4.4%
Israel 6.3%


Are we a tyrannical police state like those 3?


Defense research and applications, like NASA, have produce many inventions and technical advances that have improved American lives and productivity.
By accident, sure. Imagine how many more advances might have occurred if capital was invested purely in created technologies to improve everyday life, not to destroy it.

[Sooner5030]

By accident, sure. Imagine how many more advances might have occurred if capital was invested purely in created technologies to improve everyday life, not to destroy it.

war creates a motive like no other. Besides in the old days the capital came from debt/bonds that wouldn't have existed without war.

[sappstuf]

US spends about 4.6% of GDP on defense

others:

China 2.2%
Russia 4.4%
Israel 6.3%

I'm all for cuts in defense to $500 billion but at least I admit there is a risk of some implicit/indirect costs increases. How much will the price of oil change without our projection capabilities? Will spin-offs from war technologies stop?

I have seen 2.6% for China, but military analysts believe they are really spending about the same percentage of GDP as we are. They try to hide their true spending. Butmilitary spending has increased by about 12% a year for more than a decade, mostly on Navy ships, submarines and strategic missiles.

They want to dominate the South China Seas and some of the resources in the area.

It is a concern.

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

Besides in the old days the capital came from debt/bonds that wouldn't have existed without war.Broken window fallacy at its finest here

[soonercruiser]

I often try to ignore you because you are nuttier than a friggin fruitcake, but I will take the bait on your statement. Amtrak actually makes money in the NE corridor, and could make money on other routes as well with high-speed rail. For instance, if you could take take the train from downtown Houston to downtown Dallas in one hour, the train would be full. Same goes for downtown St. Louis to downtown Chicago.

How much have we lost building missiles that were obsolete before they were even finished?

Overall, Amtrak looses $$$$$$$ !
Can't have your own facts Profit!

Here! I'll make it easy.
I will use one of your favorite news sources. (Although, I'm sure it still isn't liberal enough for you!)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/27/amtrak-loss-comes-to-32-p_n_335020.html

Amtrak Loss Comes To $32 Per Passenger: Study
WASHINGTON — U.S. taxpayers spent about $32 subsidizing the cost of the typical Amtrak passenger in 2008, about four times the rail operator's estimate, according to a private study.

Amtrak operates a nationwide rail network, serving more than 500 destinations in 46 states. Forty-one of Amtrak's 44 routes lost money in 2008, said the study by Subsidyscope, an arm of the Pew Charitable Trusts.


More facts...
Amtrak Chugs Deeper Into the Red
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704281504576329641360701866.html

Amtrak Celebrates 40 Years of Failure
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/7405-amtrak-celebrates-40-years-of-failure

[picasso]

http://www.globalfirepower.com/navy-ships.asp
http://www.globalfirepower.com/aircraft-total.asp

Not only is everything we build bigger and better, we have more of it. We have as many supercarriers as the rest of the world has of any time carrier combined. I can understand the need to keep the Navy and Air Force relatively near what they are currently at, but ground forces can really be cut down. We aren't facing symmetric threats, if for some reason we did our navy/air force would be able to obliterate any invading force before it came remotely close to our shores. Then again I guess we need 10,000 tanks so we can be prepared to invade Canada.

So you want cuts in the size of our forces? You do realize that would mean more job cuts right?
I'm just saying we need big scary unkown weapons so it will scare the **** out of the other guy.
That kind of prevents our enemies from bugging us.

[pphilfran]

So you want cuts in the size of our forces? You do realize that would mean more job cuts right?
I'm just saying we need big scary unkown weapons so it will scare the **** out of the other guy.
That kind of prevents our enemies from bugging us.

We already did that number..Star Wars Defense Initiative....

[pphilfran]

We need to shut down bases and bring the troops home...let's spend money on them here instead of overseas...we can then slowly reduce manning over the long term...

[soonercruiser]

Are we a tyrannical police state like those 3?By accident, sure. Imagine how many more advances might have occurred if capital was invested purely in created technologies to improve everyday life, not to destroy it.

Duh!
No chance that we are the counter-balance of the "others"?
:rolleyes:

[pphilfran]

Overall, Amtrak looses $$$$$$$ !
Can't have your own facts Profit!

Here! I'll make it easy.
I will use one of your favorite news sources. (Although, I'm sure it still isn't liberal enough for you!)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/27/amtrak-loss-comes-to-32-p_n_335020.html


More facts...
Amtrak Chugs Deeper Into the Red
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704281504576329641360701866.html

Amtrak Celebrates 40 Years of Failure
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/7405-amtrak-celebrates-40-years-of-failure

It will take decades to get HSR up and running...along with local mass transit...

if we are not careful we will only have airlines for high speed travel in the US...and airlines will cost a fortune in 20 or 30 years due to fuel costs...

Then we will be behind and screwed once again...

[soonercruiser]

We need to shut down bases and bring the troops home...let's spend money on them here instead of overseas...we can then slowly reduce manning over the long term...

I do agree with cutting our overseas bases drastically.
Combine missions, maintenance, and airfield use like at Tinker.
Bring Altus to Tinker...etc.
Of course, what would that do to stateside local economies?
But, overseas, for sure!

[badger]

If the Navy cut its X Games sponsorship and didn't run a 30 second ad every break and had its little signs all over the crashie crashie course, that might save some money.

I mean, in an economy where people are actively seeking employment, including military duty employment, do they need such extensive ad campaigns anymore?

[okie52]

It will take decades to get HSR up and running...along with local mass transit...

if we are not careful we will only have airlines for high speed travel in the US...and airlines will cost a fortune in 20 or 30 years due to fuel costs...

Then we will be behind and screwed once again...

I am for HSR where it is practical...but it seems like population densities determine their success.

[soonercruiser]

It will take decades to get HSR up and running...along with local mass transit...

if we are not careful we will only have airlines for high speed travel in the US...and airlines will cost a fortune in 20 or 30 years due to fuel costs...

Then we will be behind and screwed once again...

Phil,
Read the news stories about highspeed rail in China.
They don't have riders any where near enough to pay for it!
It is similar to all their infrastructure and building projects, where most of the units are empty, 'cause noone can afford to live there!
China's crash is yet to come; but as inevitable as ours!

The only place that HSR is working profitably is in closely, and densely populated areas like the NE U.S. and Western Europe.
Why do politicians continue to try to use a hammer to screw in a wood screw?

You did see my Johnny Cashless video, didn't you?

[pphilfran]

I do agree with cutting our overseas bases drastically.
Combine missions, maintenance, and airfield use like at Tinker.
Bring Altus to Tinker...etc.
Of course, what would that do to stateside local economies?
But, overseas, for sure!

Down the road Altus needs to go...but the town would dry up and blow away...why not shut down Tinker and move them to Altus..OKC would have a better chance of living through the shutdown...

[soonercruiser]

If the Navy cut its X Games sponsorship and didn't run a 30 second ad every break and had its little signs all over the crashie crashie course, that might save some money.

I mean, in an economy where people are actively seeking employment, including military duty employment, do they need such extensive ad campaigns anymore?

Military sponsorship at NASCAR too?
:D

[pphilfran]

Phil,
Read the news stories about highspeed rail in China.
They don't have riders any where near enough to pay for it!
It is similar to all their infrastructure and building projects, where most of the units are empty, 'cause noone can afford to live there!

The only place that HSR is working profitably is in closely, and densely populated areas like the NE U.S. and Western Europe.
Why do politicians continue to try to use a hammer to screw in a wood screw?

You did see my Johnny Cashless video, didn't you?

You are missing out on what the cost of fuel for airlines will be in 20 or 30 years...the cost will be much too high...

HSR will take decades to get up and running...and HSR will be the mass transit system that takes over a bunch of airline business in the 2030's...

[pphilfran]

Military sponsorship at NASCAR too?
:D

Army sponsors a top fuel dragster...

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

So you want cuts in the size of our forces? You do realize that would mean more job cuts right?
I'm just saying we need big scary unkown weapons so it will scare the **** out of the other guy.
That kind of prevents our enemies from bugging us.
Cuts in force size as well as taxes that subsidize forces. It costs $390,000 to deploy a soldier for one year, I'm sure that money can be used to create more than one job here at home.

[soonercruiser]

You are missing out on what the cost of fuel for airlines will be in 20 or 30 years...the cost will be much too high...

HSR will take decades to get up and running...and HSR will be the mass transit system that takes over a bunch of airline business in the 2030's...

Of course, Phil, you are assuming that even another technology doesn't come along to change that.
Where is the that magnetic space coupe when you nedd it?
http://www.dicktracymuseum.com/dick-tracy/inventions/

http://members.cox.net/franklipsinic/Other/space_coupe.gif

[pphilfran]

Of course, Phil, you are assuming that even another technology doesn't come along to change that.
Where is the that magnetic space coupe when you nedd it?
http://www.dicktracymuseum.com/dick-tracy/inventions/

http://members.cox.net/franklipsinic/Other/space_coupe.gif

LOL...

I can't see anything in the future that will make a significant change in air travel cost over the next 20 or 30 years...

[sappstuf]

You are missing out on what the cost of fuel for airlines will be in 20 or 30 years...the cost will be much too high...

HSR will take decades to get up and running...and HSR will be the mass transit system that takes over a bunch of airline business in the 2030's...

The feds aren't going to have the money, do you think the private sector can make money on it?

I'm thinking not..

[pphilfran]

The feds aren't going to have the money, do you think the private sector can make money on it?

I'm thinking not..

There is money...just gotta go find it...

A little here and a little there and we have coast to coast high speed rail at 10% occupancy...:)

[sappstuf]

There is money...just gotta go find it...

A little here and a little there and we have coast to coast high speed rail at 10% occupancy...:)

You are always optimistic Phil... That is why I like you! :)

My mom rode Amtrak from OKC to San Antonio in July because she had never taken the train. Took her about 11 hours to get down here.. She sat in coach, said the seats were worse than an airplane. She got down here ok.

On the way back, the train was cancelled because of weather(!), so she took a chartered bus up to Fort Worth. The bus made a couple of stops, but for the people going to the smaller stops, they paid for a taxi for them. A taxi to go 50-60 miles....

I'm thinking the taxpayers lost more than the normal $50 per rider subsidy that day... If we didn't, then we really SHOULD get rid of Amtrak.

My mother is not interested in riding Amtrak again...

[okie52]

You are always optimistic Phil... That is why I like you! :)

My mom rode Amtrak from OKC to San Antonio in July because she had never taken the train. Took her about 11 hours to get down here.. She sat in coach, said the seats were worse than an airplane. She got down here ok.

On the way back, the train was cancelled because of weather(!), so she took a chartered bus up to Fort Worth. The bus made a couple of stops, but for the people going to the smaller stops, they paid for a taxi for them. A taxi to go 50-60 miles....

I'm thinking the taxpayers lost more than the normal $50 per rider subsidy that day... If we didn't, then we really SHOULD get rid of Amtrak.

My mother is not interested in riding Amtrak again...

What? Did she take the Heartland flyer to Ft Worth and then Amtrak to San Antonio?

Weather? He11, that was the trains strongest point.

[Midtowner]

Cuts in force size as well as taxes that subsidize forces. It costs $390,000 to deploy a soldier for one year, I'm sure that money can be used to create more than one job here at home.

To be fair, when the government cuts deficit spending, it's not like that money is spent elsewhere. That money is never borrowed, hence its economic impact never existed. $390K paid to contractors and through the DOD to deploy a soldier overseas does create wealth and jobs.

Not spending the money might be smart in the long haul in that we'll have to pay it back one day (in theory), but in the short term, these sorts of cuts are going to sting.

--of course, if these sorts of cuts don't happen, the dollar will more resemble the Mexican Peso than its present self.

[pphilfran]

My parents always wanted to do a long train trip...so they went to Seattle during the winter...

All the water froze up for most of the trip...they weren't happy...

[sappstuf]

What? Did she take the Heartland flyer to Ft Worth and then Amtrak to San Antonio?

Weather? He11, that was the trains strongest point.

Yeah. I didn't understand the weather excuse either, but that is what the conductor said and I even asked for clarification.

The saddest part was hearing the conductor yeah "all aboard" and then get on a crappy charter bus....

[okie52]

Yeah. I didn't understand the weather excuse either, but that is what the conductor said and I even asked for clarification.

The saddest part was hearing the conductor yeah "all aboard" and then get on a crappy charter bus....

Only way I could see weather is if bridge was out.

Been a long time since I have been on a bus.

[sappstuf]

On the way down, I had her get off in San Marcos instead of going all the way down to San Antonio. It takes about an hour and 15 minutes to go forty miles because of all the shared track.

[pphilfran]

You are always optimistic Phil... That is why I like you! :)

My mom rode Amtrak from OKC to San Antonio in July because she had never taken the train. Took her about 11 hours to get down here.. She sat in coach, said the seats were worse than an airplane. She got down here ok.

On the way back, the train was cancelled because of weather(!), so she took a chartered bus up to Fort Worth. The bus made a couple of stops, but for the people going to the smaller stops, they paid for a taxi for them. A taxi to go 50-60 miles....

I'm thinking the taxpayers lost more than the normal $50 per rider subsidy that day... If we didn't, then we really SHOULD get rid of Amtrak.

My mother is not interested in riding Amtrak again...

I got the 50-60 miles taxi ride beat all to hell...

Continental from Houston to Tyler...full up puddle jumper...I volunteered to step off and take a later flight...

30 minutes later I was sitting in first class on a regional jet flying to Dallas and dreaming about how I will use my free round trip voucher...

In Dallas they gave me a voucher for a taxi to Tyler...90 miles or so...I finally found a driver that would do the trip...only if he could stop by his house and get some money so he could continue to Shreveport and do some gambling...

I said sure..

Only about a half mile out of the way to the guys apartment...he runs in and another guy runs out with a 12 pack of beer and the taxi keys...

The new guy jumps into the drivers seat and in broken English he says he will drive and the original driver will stay behind...

He fires up the taxi and off we go....

After a block he tosses me a one of the Heineken beers...hell, I ain't go no bottle opener...I hand it back to the driver and he pops the cap with his teeth and hands it back...

We make it to the Tyler airport just as we finish the last beer....

[badger]

Military sponsorship at NASCAR too?
:D

The military ad campaign in nice and all, but they seem to advertise more than car companies... and car companies are advertising whorns.

Maybe all the vets like seeing their branch get mentioned on TV a lot... maybe the military gets big discounts as a public service to get their ads on the air... but I just don't see the point.

[okie52]

On the way down, I had her get off in San Marcos instead of going all the way down to San Antonio. It takes about an hour and 15 minutes to go forty miles because of all the shared track.

Sounds like a solid 30mph...

[pphilfran]

Sounds like a solid 30mph...

And that is the whole damn problem...

Our big cities are so congested there is no room for new unshared track...and to try and make a dedicated track will cost bazzilians (or is it brazzilians? I forget) and take forever...

[Sooner5030]

cutting defense requires deciding what capabilities are needed vs 'nice to haves' that have to be let go. An accross the board cut is not desired but usually that's the only way to get the cuts approved since no one wants to make difficult decisions.

[cccasooner2]

Yeah, like I should believe self-serving analysis by Vice Chiefs. I want the truth from the chiefs not these lowly dooshes. I’m guessing that what everyone in D.C. wants is the real payoff as in the former Soviet Union. Break the country with military spending, divy up the spoils among the diplomats, form alliances with the thugs, and party, party, party. Those not invited to the party are strongly encouraged to go elsewhere.

Not once did I use the words communists, Hitler, Obama, Bush, Lindsey Lohan, or Nancy Grace.

[sappstuf]

Sounds like a solid 30mph...

Another 200mph couldn't be THAT expensive...

[soonercruiser]

Yeah. I didn't understand the weather excuse either, but that is what the conductor said and I even asked for clarification.

The saddest part was hearing the conductor yeah "all aboard" and then get on a crappy charter bus....

OK you Photoshop geeks!
Get busy!We need am antrak engine on one end; and a Greyhound on the other.
(Oh! Did I leave that a little too "open"?)
:rolleyes:

[diverdog]

I do agree with cutting our overseas bases drastically.
Combine missions, maintenance, and airfield use like at Tinker.
Bring Altus to Tinker...etc.
Of course, what would that do to stateside local economies?
But, overseas, for sure!

Altus should be closed...period. I think Tinker could be closed as well. It is nuts to have bases in the center of the nation to service aircraft on the coast.

[GKeeper316]

Altus should be closed...period. I think Tinker could be closed as well. It is nuts to have bases in the center of the nation to service aircraft on the coast.

actually, the exact opposite is true. oklahoma, being roughly geographically center of the US, is the best spot for a logistics and maintenance center. why would we want to fly a plane from pensacola to mather when tinker is a helluva lot closer?

[diverdog]

actually, the exact opposite is true. oklahoma, being roughly geographically center of the US, is the best spot for a logistics and maintenance center. why would we want to fly a plane from pensacola to mather when tinker is a helluva lot closer?

Fix it at pensacola. I will admit Tinker would be tougher to close than Altus.

[GKeeper316]

Fix it at pensacola. I will admit Tinker would be tougher to close than Altus.

it takes a lot of people and very large structures to maintain aircraft. thats why its easier to do it all in one place.

[diverdog]

it takes a lot of people and very large structures to maintain aircraft. thats why its easier to do it all in one place.

Oh I know I was a flyer.

[soonercruiser]

Altus should be closed...period. I think Tinker could be closed as well. It is nuts to have bases in the center of the nation to service aircraft on the coast.

Which proves that you know nothing about the missions at Tinker.
Tinker is "THE" most important of the Air Force's 4 depots.
:P