All good points.
Yes, the world does need the US economy. And that is out saving grace.
But, I am very worried about the implied arrogance between that need and our seeming abuse of it. I just wish we would clean-up our fiscal act.
"We need to cleanup our fiscal act"----I couldn't agree with you more!
What line items do we need to start with though? I for one DO NOT feel we need to start with the defense budget though.
I say this, because I'm a Reserve officer and because I know history. Historically we have ALWAYS cut the defense budget AFTER a "war", AND it has ALWAYS come back to haunt us. Case in point: #1 WWI--less than 100,000 soldiers in the Army at the start. We didn't get involved in WWI because"officially", we were neutral. Unofficially--we had to "ramp up" production AND conscription(think draft), or we would have gotten our a**es handed to us. #2 Pre world war II...same story. #3 Korea---Task Force Smith-completely under manned, under trained, under gunned...significant losses, until Inchon. #4 Vietnam---once again we had to ramp up and conscript. #5 Post Vietnam, carter years---Thank God for Ronald Reagan! If he hadn't of boosted the defense budget, demanded better trained forces, and demanded new weapons systems, Desert Storm WOULD NOT have been a success! #6 Post Desert Storm 1990's---the great "bloodletting" of the Clinton, Don't Ask, Don't Tell administration---Twin Towers bombing #1, Bosnia, Africa Embassy bombings, U.S.S. Cole, WTC/Pentagon 9-11---during this era I saw my beloved Army literally and figuratively "gutted" by Clinton.
Now that the 9-11 commission pointed out the problems between the FBI and CIA leadership, it truly WAS a "gutting" of our total national security assets! Sure, we had a good economy, and prosperity as a NATION during the 90's, BUT, at what cost? If we had the CIA in top form with a fat budget, would 9-11 have happened? If Clinton would have had "warriors" in charge instead of "politicians" would it have happened?
My whole point for my "soapbox lecture" is this: It costs MORE to our national security infrastructure, if we keep taking the notion that, "Oh well, we won that war and the Soviet Union is gone, so we don't have ANY enemies anymore...so let's just cut the defense budget!"
Wouldn't it make MORE sense to keep the budget at a constant level of "buying power"...a constant budget with inflationary increases built in, so that we can research, design, test and then build NEW, and MORE, cutting edge weapons systems, and maintian our troop levels at around 1MM soldiers. I certainly think this way of thinking would save money over time, as you would be funding systems at TODAY's $$$'s, vs. Tomorrow's dollars! The way we do it now with our downsize, ramp up, go to war, downsize, ramp up, go to war mentality is that it costs the American Taxpayer more $$$'s down the road!