Posted on 09/17/2011 8:19:00 AM PDT by SkyPilot
15:27 GMT, September 16, 2011 This week the defense subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee cut $26 billion from the Obama Administration's fiscal 2012 budget request. The move is intended to align future Pentagon spending with the requirements of the recently enacted Budget Control Act. However, the cuts the subcommittee proposes to implement would destroy at least 200,000 jobs, and probably more at a time when the government is contemplating going deeper into debt to fund the president's jobs bill.
Consider the $13.3 billion the appropriators propose to delete from military investment accounts -- $9 billion for procurement and $4.3 billion for R&D. Let's assume that every $200,000 in investment spending creates one direct job, either in the government or the private sector. At that rate, $13.3 billion in cuts would destroy 66,500 jobs. But that's just the beginning, because economic models indicate that for every direct job created, two indirect jobs are also created in retail, construction, education and other activities made possible by the spending of defense workers. So the total hit to the economy from the proposed cuts is actually 66,500 times three, or 199,500 jobs.
Note that I have not included in this calculation job losses resulting from the $12.6 billion in other proposed cuts to the defense request, such as the $8.2 billion reduction in operations and maintenance. The latter cuts by themselves undoubtedly will destroy thousands of additional jobs.
These calculations illustrate that defense cuts are incompatible with the stated intention of both political parties to create jobs. If one congressional committee is considering spending billions of dollars on a jobs bill while another committee is cutting billions of dollars from defense that also would sustain jobs, where is the net gain to the economy? Does Washington really believe that building a new bridge in Kentucky creates jobs, but a defense plant or military base there does not?
---- Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D. Early Warning Blog, Lexington Institute
Good job Obama!
I agree with some Libertarian ideas but I consider myself to be a common sense American. Where are the Europeans, Japanese, Germans, and Saudis paying for their own defense. They live under our defense umbrella while only tacitly supporting many of the US initiatives. Our leaders sit idly while OPEC continually rips us off as one example of the Saudi gratefulness.
So let me see if I have this right. We cut 29 billion from defense and kill 200,000 jobs for a net savings of about $150,000 p/job and we spend 447 billion at $5,000,000 p/job and create 200,000 jobs,OK I think I have it. Only in America/ sarc
"The widely held sentiment among Tea Party Patriot members is that every item in the budget, including military spending and foreign aid, must be on the table," said Mark Meckler, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots. "It is time to get serious about preserving the country for our posterity. The mentality that certain programs are 'off the table' must be taken off the table."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/23/politics/main7274710.shtml
Gotta pay for that 20% pay increase for the new UAW employees.
Yup.
No.
There is no argument with me, only this inescapable truth: we are no longer a nation that produces anything, or a majority nation of workers. We have half of the people in this nation paying no Federal taxes, sitting around on their arses, collecting Direct Deposit checks in one form or another (SSI, SSDI, AFDC, SNAP card, etc), or scamming Medicare/Medicaid.
DoD spending is a lifeblood of economic activity. Period.
Further, spending on Defense is one of the few things the Constitution actually authorizes the Federal government to pursue. It isn't authorized to send out Social Security or disability checks. It isn't authorized to be involved in education. And it isn't authorized to tell us how to eat, dress, flush our toilets or what kind of light bulb we can use.
Spending on Defense as a percentage of GDP is not what is bankrupting our nation.
Entitlements are bankrupting our nation.
Moreover, once we lose certain key industries in aerospace or other forms of high tech manufacturing, we don't turn them on like a switch overnight.
If our nation gets into a full scale, real war (not like Iraq, but think North Korea and China at the same time) - we will be in a world of hurt. Then, everyone will clamor about "why weren't we prepared." It will be because instead of doing what the Constitution authorizes, we were sending out entitlement checks to people.
Lastly, I am outraged that there is a lack of outrage about what President Obama and the Democrats are doing. They are crowing about needing to spend a half of a Trillion dollars to throw money at state teacher jobs (and the teachers got $40 Billion in bailout money under Pelosi Reid in August of 2010!) - but for DoD civilians and defense industry, they can get in the unemployment line.
Yes, we have to prioritize as a nation and clean up our fiscal mess.
Entitlement reform is how we accomplish it. If we gut defense, and there is another American tragedy like 911 or Pearl Harbor, expect Obama to not even show his face.
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.