Reviving Redistributionism

[TennNC]

That is easy, 80% of the military and law enforcement are conservatives!

Who's talking about law enforcement? What does that have to do with wasteful defense spending?

 

[volsforever27]

If you're asking why I always point to the military first, it's because I sense I'm in the minority on this issue here on this board and that the common perception is simply to rail against "entitlements" - healthcare, welfare, education spending, housing assistance, etc., while turning a blind eye to military waste.

I covered defense on Capitol Hill for 3 years, and I learned that there's an egregious amount of waste under the guise of "protecting our freedoms." Listen, I believe in a strong military. I want to pay soldiers more than they're making. I want to give them better armor and guns and benefits, etc. I want to have the best weapons. But we can easily do that and still cut an enormous amount of wasteful defense spending. It's fat on top of fat I'm talking about - not "scaling back the military."

Some lawmakers and defense contractors use the name "defense" to get rich, waste money, go on junkets, etc. And I feel the need to remind all those fiscal conservatives on here that it continues.

I mean, the GAO found the DOD couldn't account for more than $1 trillion in expenditures. That should make all Americans - hawks and doves - outraged.

Yes, the DOD isn't the only one that wastes, but it's a huge one, and those serious about cutting waste should acknowledge it.

And I'm against wasteful spending period, but you can't honestly believe that the way to solve our problems is to go after military spending first. Do you know what kind of list iIcould make right now with all the wasteful spending? It just seems like you're picking on that when there is a lot of blame to go around, and I know for a fact that's what members of your party would love to do (cut the military).

 

[allvol123]

The DOD does waste. The DOE and others simply are not needed.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Who's talking about law enforcement? What does that have to do with wasteful defense spending?

The federal government gives grants to local law enforcement and the failure of government is not limited to Washington.

Failure occurs at the state and local level.

Also, why is it only the DOD is wasteful with you?

Plenty of stuff to rail on!

 

[TennNC]

Cut all waste out!

This crap is across the board!

Why is welfare being paid to grandparents, parents and children living in the same household?

That isn't waste?

Cut every thing large to small!

Getting rid of waste in terms of corruption and manipulation of funding is one thing -- all people should agree to that.

Cutting programs is where it gets sticky, whether you're talking about defense or social programs. It's hard to force someone off the teet...

 

[OrangeEmpire]

And I'm against wasteful spending period, but you can't honestly believe that the way to solve our problems is to go after military spending first. Do you know what kind of list iIcould make right now with all the wasteful spending? It just seems like you're picking on that when there is a lot of blame to go around, and I know for a fact that's what members of your party would love to do (cut the military).

Because the super duper hardcore lefties hate the military.

Of course these people bring up Murtha but I can tell you that Murtha is not a Marine.

 

[TennNC]

And I'm against wasteful spending period, but you can't honestly believe that the way to solve our problems is to go after military spending first. Do you know what kind of list iIcould make right now with all the wasteful spending? It just seems like you're picking on that when there is a lot of blame to go around, and I know for a fact that's what members of your party would love to do (cut the military).

Not picking on anyone.

I'm balancing the discussion on here. If I spoke with truly hard-core liberals (I know you think I'm one, but brother, I ain't), I'd be arguing for paying soldiers more, cutting wasteful welfare spending, etc.

 

[KB5252]

If you're asking why I always point to the military first, it's because I sense I'm in the minority on this issue here on this board and that the common perception is simply to rail against "entitlements" - healthcare, welfare, education spending, housing assistance, etc., while turning a blind eye to military waste.

I covered defense on Capitol Hill for 3 years, and I learned that there's an egregious amount of waste under the guise of "protecting our freedoms." Listen, I believe in a strong military. I want to pay soldiers more than they're making. I want to give them better armor and guns and benefits, etc. I want to have the best weapons. But we can easily do that and still cut an enormous amount of wasteful defense spending. It's fat on top of fat I'm talking about - not "scaling back the military."

Some lawmakers and defense contractors use the name "defense" to get rich, waste money, go on junkets, etc. And I feel the need to remind all those fiscal conservatives on here that it continues.

I mean, the GAO found the DOD couldn't account for more than $1 trillion in expenditures. That should make all Americans - hawks and doves - outraged.

Yes, the DOD isn't the only one that wastes, but it's a huge one, and those serious about cutting waste should acknowledge it.

I agree, but lets throw a what if in there (to be clear I don't know if this is the case). Lets say this money is being spent on covert, Delta Force type stuff. While the idea of blind spending does bother me I can see many situations where I nor any other average American needs to know. Would that change your attitude on the subject or does that idea not appeal to you either? Just playing a little Devil's Advocate.

 

[TennNC]

Also, why is it only the DOD is wasteful with you?

I've stated multiple times, in this very thread, that the DOD isn't the only wasteful department.

Don't falsely accuse me either.

 

[TennNC]

I agree, but lets throw a what if in there (to be clear I don't know if this is the case). Lets say this money is being spent on covert, Delta Force type stuff. While the idea of blind spending does bother me I can see many situations where I nor any other average American needs to know. Would that change your attitude on the subject or does that idea not appeal to you either? Just playing a little Devil's Advocate.

I see your point, but that's just not accurate. It has nothing to do with that sort of spending - there's intelligence spending bills every year for those very types of missions that are bundled into overall defense spending - we don't know exactly what's in there, but it's billions upon billions every year, and the specifics are kept secret for a reason.

The reason DOD can't account for $1 trillion is that it's so massive it's too easy to waste money. A few million here, a few million there - it's very hard to hold an agency that big accountable.

 

[KB5252]

Tenn NC the easiest way to eliminate pork is to start with the smaller stuff and work your way up to the biggies. Our government has grown way too large, there are many agencies that do the same jobs and they need to be eliminated. We need to abolish everything that is not efficient in doing it's job (sadly this would mean most programs). Government jobs are very cushy by nature and we need someone who is going to light a fire under them and make them produce results.

 

[KB5252]

I see your point, but that's just not accurate. It has nothing to do with that sort of spending - there's intelligence spending bills every year for those very types of missions that are bundled into overall defense spending - we don't know exactly what's in there, but it's billions upon billions every year, and the specifics are kept secret for a reason.

The reason DOD can't account for $1 trillion is that it's so massive it's too easy to waste money. A few million here, a few million there - it's very hard to hold an agency that big accountable.

just wanted to see what your take would be.

 

[TennNC]

The DOD does waste. The DOE and others simply are not needed.

Department of Education or Department of Energy?

Energy is closely tied to defense spending (weapons, nuclear weapons control, nuclear reactor spending for the Navy).

Total federal spending on education is about $90 billion.

Total federal spending on energy is about $24 billion.

Total defense spending is about $550 billion.

Social Security is a whopping $586 billion.

 

[TennNC]

Tenn NC the easiest way to eliminate pork is to start with the smaller stuff and work your way up to the biggies. Our government has grown way too large, there are many agencies that do the same jobs and they need to be eliminated. We need to abolish everything that is not efficient in doing it's job (sadly this would mean most programs). Government jobs are very cushy by nature and we need someone who is going to light a fire under them and make them produce results.

don't disagree with that in theory - I just think it's easier said than done. It's a monster.

BTW, I think we'd all be a lot happier if we didn't have a massive debt - the interest we pay on that debt (that's still growing by leaps and bounds, btw) is about $244 billion each year. We balanced the budget and drew down the debt significantly during the Clinton years (correct?), but it's swelled enormously the past 8 years.

 

[KB5252]

Department of Education or Department of Energy?

Energy is closely tied to defense spending (weapons, nuclear weapons control, nuclear reactor spending for the Navy).

Total federal spending on education is about $90 billion.

Total federal spending on energy is about $24 billion.

Total defense spending is about $550 billion.

Social Security is a whopping $586 billion.

How much of that gets wasted?

 

[KB5252]

don't disagree with that in theory - I just think it's easier said than done. It's a monster.

BTW, I think we'd all be a lot happier if we didn't have a massive debt - the interest we pay on that debt (that's still growing by leaps and bounds, btw) is about $244 billion each year. We balanced the budget and drew down the debt significantly during the Clinton years (correct?), but it's swelled enormously the past 8 years.

GW's most glaring failure to conservatives. Growing government and spending like a drunk democrat! Thought you might like those last two words TNC!

 

[TennNC]

How much of that gets wasted?

Side note - maybe my computer is acting up, but some of the posts quoted on here appear as just scattered letters.

Just me?

 

[KB5252]

Side note - maybe my computer is acting up, but some of the posts quoted on here appear as just scattered letters.

Just me?

no problems on my end. Bring it to Freak's attention.

 

[volsforever27]

Side note - maybe my computer is acting up, but some of the posts quoted on here appear as just scattered letters.

Just me?

It's a vast right wing conspiracy.

 

[volinbham]

BTW, I think we'd all be a lot happier if we didn't have a massive debt - the interest we pay on that debt (that's still growing by leaps and bounds, btw) is about $244 billion each year. We balanced the budget and drew down the debt significantly during the Clinton years (correct?), but it's swelled enormously the past 8 years.

Here's a table with the deficit/surplus of each year.

The debt grew under Clinton but has grown more under Bush. I (and many economists) would attribute much of the deficit reduction of the late 90's to the rapid growth of the economy and accordingly, some of the return to deficits resulting from the slowing of that growth. Of course, war spending has been a large contributor to the W. deficits.

It's also instructive to look at deficits as a percentage of GDP.

US Government Budget Surpluses and Deficits - Social and Economic Policy - Global Policy Forum

 

[MG1968]

Department of Education or Department of Energy?

Energy is closely tied to defense spending (weapons, nuclear weapons control, nuclear reactor spending for the Navy).

Total federal spending on education is about $90 billion.

Total federal spending on energy is about $24 billion.

Total defense spending is about $550 billion.

Social Security is a whopping $586 billion.

of the four departments you listed, only one is mandated by the Constitution as a responsibility of the federal government. I agree that there is waste at every level, in every department, and it should be eliminated or at least sharply reduced. However, I don't agree with your contention that tax increases on the wealthy and corporations will bring about the economic change that you are wanting to see.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

I've stated multiple times, in this very thread, that the DOD isn't the only wasteful department.

Don't falsely accuse me either.

The conversation is much better when we don't like each other!

 

[T-TownVol]

Here's a table with the deficit/surplus of each year.

The debt grew under Clinton but has grown more under Bush. I (and many economists) would attribute much of the deficit reduction of the late 90's to the rapid growth of the economy and accordingly, some of the return to deficits resulting from the slowing of that growth. Of course, war spending has been a large contributor to the W. deficits.

It's also instructive to look at deficits as a percentage of GDP.

US Government Budget Surpluses and Deficits - Social and Economic Policy - Global Policy Forum

It's just easier to blame Bush.

 

[TennNC]

GW's most glaring failure to conservatives. Growing government and spending like a drunk democrat! Thought you might like those last two words TNC!

Well played.

But remember, W quit drinking a long time ago. Perhaps he was listening to his gut, not booze, when he approved all that spending.

 

[TennNC]

of the four departments you listed, only one is mandated by the Constitution as a responsibility of the federal government. I agree that there is waste at every level, in every department, and it should be eliminated or at least sharply reduced. However, I don't agree with your contention that tax increases on the wealthy and corporations will bring about the economic change that you are wanting to see.

Non sequitur?