Obama refuses to cut the obvious: obamacare.
Debt struggle could put Obamacare on cutting table
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/07/debt-struggle-could-put-obamacare-cutting-table
“Amid wrangling over raising the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling, Obama has rebuffed efforts to scale back his health care overhaul, taking a hard line that has left large potential savings untapped, some say.
Analysts argue that any serious plan to bring down the deficit must address mounting health care costs, something lacking in both GOP and Democratic proposals.
“Despite his assurances, Obamacare doesn’t bend [downward] the cost curve at all,” said Kathryn Nix, a health care policy analyst at the conservative Heritage
Foundation. “It’s going to blow up costs. So, no, we can’t take this off the table in the debt debate.”
We spend half the world’s defense budget. We do not need to spend that much. A whole portion of our defense budget goes into overpriced gadgets anyway. There are a ton of things we can cut without sacrificing defense in the slightest. For instance, we have all but one of the world’s supercarriers (the French Charles de Gaulle being the other). We have 11 supercarriers, and we are planning on replacing them. Do we really need to? Not really. It’s just the philosophy of the DoD, which is another government department, to be a 100 years ahead of everyone else, and have 10x their garbage, and then they pay extra to government contractors for it. We are not fighting the Cold War anymore, and we can’t afford to pretend to.
How many of them just want their $600,000 10’ Gurgling Frog Fairy Statue back in the budget?
What do you think the role of the United States military should be in the world? That is the key question that is often overlooked in these discussions.
Ron Paul’s answer is that there shouldn’t be one, and he believes any attempt to make us involved overseas is probably the result of a conspiracy to take away our liberties. That’s why I’ve come to believe he’s nuts.
My answer is that the job of the United States military is to seek and destroy actual enemies (those who have attacked, or are actively preparing to attack imminently) of the United States from small bases of operations (no occupations). Furthermore, we should interpose in conflicts where an aggressor nation is seeking to conquer and impose its will on other nations and regional players are not adequate to prevent this from occurring (i.e., Hitler in Europe after the fall of France). What else, if anything, should we be involved in, and why?
Defense spending has increased 44% since the Dems took congress in 2006. They’ve been very generous to defense spending.
Mike
I think we could do the following:
1. Substantially cut back on European force deployments except for a minimal presence to support operations in the Middle East, such as air bases.
2. Possibly cancel the F-35 and replace it with a much-upgraded F-16 model with an upgraded wing for improved maneuverability, a derivative of the Pratt & Whitney F119 engine, the F-35's radar and a new cockpit derived from the F-35 cockpit, and possibly using a licensed version of the MBDA Meteor missile capable to taking down targets around 100 km (62 miles) away.
3. Phase out a large number of "middle officers" from all branches of the armed forces.
In a $687 billion Defense budget there is at least 10% that can be cut. Conservative are never going to win this war if they fall into this old DC trap.
DC always avoids making any serious spending cuts by pitting one interest group against the other. Defense Hawks against Entitlements, Domestic spending vrs security spending etc.
The only way to win this Budget battle is to take these tactics away from DC. EVERYTHING has to be on the table for at least some reduction.