Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A QUOTE YOU MAY NEVER HAVE READ, George Washington's Prescient "Eisenhower Moment"
Source: George Washington | 5/16/2014 | By Laz A. Mataz

Posted on 05/16/2014 7:35:26 AM PDT by Lazamataz

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 last
To: PowderMonkey

Yes. . .sadly, you are correct.


41 posted on 05/16/2014 9:42:14 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

I suspect they need additional funding for related maintenance, upkeep and training...


42 posted on 05/16/2014 9:45:57 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

Look up the overhead, G&A and fee rates you guys charged for 3 missles.

As long as the spigot keeps running, I’ll keep making money, as will the rest of the DC area. CSC and Northrup Grumman being spitting headquarterd spitting distance from my house boosts my home value significantly. I won’t complain too loudly


43 posted on 05/16/2014 9:50:06 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: PoloSec
If you compare the number of troops we now have, to the population we now have. I think you'll see that our military is hardly "overgrown" in the way Washington was referring to. In 2013 we had about 0.5% of the population in the military, compared to around 1.5% during the 50s and 60s. And further cuts are planned.

We now spend a much lessor proportion of the gross domestic product, about 3.5% in FY13, on the military than we did in the '50s and and early '60s, when defense outlays were about 8-9% of GDP but a larger fraction on the federal government as a whole.

For example in FY62, defense was 9.3% of GDP and federal spending as a whole was 18.8% of GDP, the deficient was 1% of GDP, entitlements were 6.1% In FY12, defense was 4.3%, total federal outlays were 22.8%, the deficit was 7.4% and entitlements were 22.8% You could have eliminated the defense budget entirely and there would sill have been a 3.1% of GDP deficit, assuming one didn't increase entitlements, which with all the people that would have thrown on extended unemployment, food stamps etc, the deficit probably would have been higher than that, not allowing for the decrease in GDP, which would make the deficit a larger percentage yet.

44 posted on 05/16/2014 10:05:18 AM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MadIsh32
Look up the overhead, G&A and fee rates you guys charged for 3 missles.

They were "hand made" developmental birds, for both our system and Patriot, and thus quite expensive.

But you go look up profit margins for say Lockheed Martin, verses something like General Mills, or Conagra.

45 posted on 05/16/2014 10:14:57 AM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
The fact is that the military and the MiC are shrinking, more than is safe in today's world.
46 posted on 05/16/2014 10:16:41 AM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

I didn’t realize General Mills and Conangra got 90% + of their revenue from the tax payer


47 posted on 05/16/2014 11:16:54 AM PDT by MadIsh32 (In order to be pro-market, sometimes you must be anti-big business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Hulka
So why do they always leave out Congress in the quote?
48 posted on 05/16/2014 11:37:52 AM PDT by Domangart (LBGT = NAMBLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

I thinks is particularly appropriate in light of our increasingly militarizes police forces and government agencies.


49 posted on 05/16/2014 1:09:13 PM PDT by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan

Excellent—thank you.


50 posted on 05/16/2014 1:12:37 PM PDT by exit82 ("The Taliban is on the inside of the building" E. Nordstrom 10-10-12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Domangart

Because they never read the text or researched what he was saying. Never let a good tag-line stop an agenda.

Also, in the speech, he commented on the emerging influence of academia because of increased government grants and research funding. Same caveat: Need informed citizens and “councils of government” (Congress and such things).


51 posted on 05/16/2014 4:26:35 PM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Thank you for your insights, dear Laz!


52 posted on 05/16/2014 8:32:15 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
It is interesting to watch Americans arming themselves at the same time. Almost like they know what is coming.

They do.
53 posted on 05/18/2014 3:30:13 AM PDT by Robert Teesdale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson