4 ms·

> Funny that he'd lay the blame on entitlements when it could just as easily be laid on out-of-control military spending with the Terrorism boogeyman cracking t

> Funny that he'd lay the blame on entitlements when it could just as easily be laid on out-of-control military spending with the Terrorism boogeyman cracking the whip. Out of control military spending? As a percentage of GDP military spending has had an overall downward trend since the Korean War. Measuring in terms of dollars does not account for overall growth of the economy. There's nothing "out of control" about US military spending. https://images.app.goo.gl/g1j2vkJz8UpdHcvU9 https://images.app.goo.gl/g1j2vkJz8UpdHcvU9

toomuchtodo 8y ago
When you “can’t afford” healthcare and education for your citizens, but have a bigger military than the next 10 countries combined, your military spending is out of control and your priorities are in drastic need of re-evaluation.
- manfredo 8y ago
  Regardless of your thoughts on what military spending should be, the above poster's claim that military spending is a greater cause of economic burden than entitlements is patently false. The economic burden of the United States military spending has been diminishing, not increasing.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - code_duck 8y ago
    We’re still doing things like spending $2 billion to cleanup waste left from making nuclear weapons in the 1940s.
    - manfredo 8y ago
      Which accounts for less than half of one percent of the US defense budget. The fact remains: we're spending 3-4x less of our GDP on defense than we were in the 60s. There's no way to justify the claim that defense spending is "out of control".
      - code_duck 8y ago
        I was referring to one project that I know about in New Mexico. $2 billion is definitely not the entire budget for environmental remediation, and it also is funded through DoE etc, not necessarily the military. I think it would be easy to support the assertion that military spending is out of control. Just because it was worse in the 60s doesn’t mean it isn’t wrong now. Our military has very sloppy accounting and has lost a couple trillion dollars, but we keep handing them 3/4 a trillion a year and rising. The amount of potential other projects which would be extremely useful for the populace, and we could find with just last year’s increase of over $50 billion, is staggering. Not to mention, a good portion of this is borrowed money. Military activities continue to create pollution that we’re going to have to clean up in the future. Given the government’s other financial obligations that are going underserved such as infrastructure and health care, it’s obvious fiscal irresponsibility, to say the least. I’m all for being able to defend ourselves. I would feel a lot better if I felt like our resources were being well spent all around.
        manfredo 8y ago
        How is a form of spending that has had an overall downward trend of 3-4x over the course of the last half century "out of control"? A consistent reduction over time is the complete opposite or what I and probably most readers think of when they think of out of control spending.
        code_duck 8y ago
        I’m not the one who started using the phrase “out-of-control”, so I don’t feel the need to keep defending it (you might be mistaking me for the poster who did use that phrase?). I’m still far from convinced it doesn’t apply, however. Even adjusted for inflation, United States military expenditures have risen by over six times since the 40s. Calling it a “consistent reduction over time” is fairly ludicrous. That the rest of the economy has expanded more isn’t really relevant to my point of view. We spend three times as much is the nearest other country, every year. I don’t really care if it’s “out-of-control”, but I am concerned that it’s clearly excessive. Regardless of what the GDP is, we could be spending the vast resources to the tune of $300 billion and tens of thousands of employees on something else.
peisistratos 8y ago
The chart is incorrect because it does not take into account hundreds of billions in veteran's benefits, nor interest paid on past military spending (and as there is a budget deficit, the current year's military deficit spending will be tacked onto next year's military debt interest).
- manfredo 8y ago
  This cuts both ways, the spending on veterans post Korean War, WWII, and the Vietnam War was probably very large as well. The point is the overall trend is down. The economic burden of the US defense budget is decreasing, not increasing. Our military spending as a percentage of GDP has dropped by roughly 4x since the 1960s. From around 12% to around 4%. In no way can a reasonable person describe our military spending as "out of control".

toomuchtodo 8y ago

When you “can’t afford” healthcare and education for your citizens, but have a bigger military than the next 10 countries combined, your military spending is out of control and your priorities are in drastic need of re-evaluation.

manfredo 8y ago
Regardless of your thoughts on what military spending should be, the above poster's claim that military spending is a greater cause of economic burden than entitlements is patently false. The economic burden of the United States military spending has been diminishing, not increasing.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- code_duck 8y ago
  We’re still doing things like spending $2 billion to cleanup waste left from making nuclear weapons in the 1940s.
  - manfredo 8y ago
    Which accounts for less than half of one percent of the US defense budget. The fact remains: we're spending 3-4x less of our GDP on defense than we were in the 60s. There's no way to justify the claim that defense spending is "out of control".
    - code_duck 8y ago
      I was referring to one project that I know about in New Mexico. $2 billion is definitely not the entire budget for environmental remediation, and it also is funded through DoE etc, not necessarily the military. I think it would be easy to support the assertion that military spending is out of control. Just because it was worse in the 60s doesn’t mean it isn’t wrong now. Our military has very sloppy accounting and has lost a couple trillion dollars, but we keep handing them 3/4 a trillion a year and rising. The amount of potential other projects which would be extremely useful for the populace, and we could find with just last year’s increase of over $50 billion, is staggering. Not to mention, a good portion of this is borrowed money. Military activities continue to create pollution that we’re going to have to clean up in the future. Given the government’s other financial obligations that are going underserved such as infrastructure and health care, it’s obvious fiscal irresponsibility, to say the least. I’m all for being able to defend ourselves. I would feel a lot better if I felt like our resources were being well spent all around.
      - manfredo 8y ago
        How is a form of spending that has had an overall downward trend of 3-4x over the course of the last half century "out of control"? A consistent reduction over time is the complete opposite or what I and probably most readers think of when they think of out of control spending.
        code_duck 8y ago
        I’m not the one who started using the phrase “out-of-control”, so I don’t feel the need to keep defending it (you might be mistaking me for the poster who did use that phrase?). I’m still far from convinced it doesn’t apply, however. Even adjusted for inflation, United States military expenditures have risen by over six times since the 40s. Calling it a “consistent reduction over time” is fairly ludicrous. That the rest of the economy has expanded more isn’t really relevant to my point of view. We spend three times as much is the nearest other country, every year. I don’t really care if it’s “out-of-control”, but I am concerned that it’s clearly excessive. Regardless of what the GDP is, we could be spending the vast resources to the tune of $300 billion and tens of thousands of employees on something else.

peisistratos 8y ago

The chart is incorrect because it does not take into account hundreds of billions in veteran's benefits, nor interest paid on past military spending (and as there is a budget deficit, the current year's military deficit spending will be tacked onto next year's military debt interest).

manfredo 8y ago
This cuts both ways, the spending on veterans post Korean War, WWII, and the Vietnam War was probably very large as well. The point is the overall trend is down. The economic burden of the US defense budget is decreasing, not increasing. Our military spending as a percentage of GDP has dropped by roughly 4x since the 1960s. From around 12% to around 4%. In no way can a reasonable person describe our military spending as "out of control".