No problem. The Republicans just agreed to lift the sequestration along with raising the debt limit and funding Obama care.
Maybe if they protected our borders, stopped importing muslims, and stopped spying on us they could do a better job with the money they have.
I’ll worry about the mechanical condition of the car after we deal with the drunken, wasted crazy loon behind the wheel driving us around by the sound method.
Additionally, the sequester will eventually reduce economic output and delay the federal debt from reaching 100 percent of GDP by only two years, in about 2033, the report shows...
Last years U.S. GDP was $15.7 trillion. National debt at the end of 2012 was $16.4 trillion. Figures vary with the sources, but we are there now.
Here is the breakdown of the defense budget as of 2010. While there have been some changes, this still works as a rule of thumb for defense expenditures. Operations include costs associated with Iraq and Afghanistan.
Operations and maintenance $283.3 billion
Military Personnel $154.2 billion
Procurement $140.1 billion
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation $79.1 billion
Military Construction $23.9 billion
Family Housing $3.1 billion
Total Spending $683.7 billion
So, given these rough figures, the first three figures are where cuts need to happen, because they would have the least impact.
Were I to make cuts, beginning with Operations and Maintenance, I would contract deployments from the majority of nations where deployment serves no discernible defense or foreign policy interest. Currently the US has forces deployed to about 100 countries. This could easily be reduced to just two dozen countries.
Next, cuts to military personnel would be by slashing “double dipping”. For example, an Army LTC gets full retirement, at the same time as laterally transferring to a Government Service job on the same post, at the same pay as an active duty LTC. After a limited number of years in the GS job, he gets retirement both from the military and his GS job, both paid for by the Pentagon. Even if he moves on to a third job, often as a defense consultant to a contractor.
Next, cuts to procurement is easily done with the elimination of cost overruns. When a contractor bids on building a ship, for example, his bid is based on the current plan. But then, every admiral in the Navy decides he wants expensive changes made, often just as an ego trip. This can raise the price of the ship by two or three times, and you end up with a *less* effective warship.
The way around this problem is to create a date certain prior to bidding, in which the design is finalized, and only components that are modular and plug and play can be upgraded. And other changes must have the approval of a single commander.
>> A combination of budget cuts and escalating compensation costs will reduce the U.S. military’s fighting forces by at least 50 percent by 2021
It’s been a week.
The Navy doesn't even have 300 ships. She's been fighting to become a 300 ship Navy for the past decade.
The Marine Corps is a Corps, i.e. 3 active divisions and one in reserve. Any less and it isn't a Corps. What are they going to do, change the name and mission to US Marine Division?
Nuts!