Military downsizing?

[Outis]

Proposing spending cuts is always easy in the abstract, but actually finding substantial (so this excludes the normal whipping boys of Congressional pay and earmarks) sources of possible cuts is much easier said than done. I've long suspected the best thing to do would be to cut the military to more essential functions, privatize NASA, and end government sponsorship of the arts. This makes me popular with absolutely nobody.

I could see that if NASA or arts endowment was a big chunk, but they're not. That's cutting toenails, not cutting the budget.

Medicare fraud. SocSec fraud. DoD fraud. These are three areas that would help, and getting these under better control would be a significant improvement, but there's more to it than that. I'd like to see the off-shoring loophole closed. There's been good progress on reducing the deficit: if we can keep that going to the point where we actually have a surplus, we need to use that surplus to reduce the principle on our foreign debt. (I'm not nearly as worried about reducing domestic debt.)

I want to see the DoD procurement program completely scrapped. I want to see it go from a pork-barrel process to a needs-based process. And frankly, if a base needs to be closed or serves no useful purpose, I don't want to have to continue to use that base because some joke of a Congress-critter whines about "My district will suffer!" Same with military contracts--if the DoD says they don't need an umpty-million dollar per unit platform, I don't want it rammed down their throats because some Congress-critter likes voting for pork for his district.

Installment number 473 on why I would never be elected to office.

[Sam]

including your wife

However, I suspect we should cut obummercare, a LOT of foreign aid and earmarking first.

Bill Gates seems to have taken to asking people if they'd accept cutting foreign aid down to 5% of the budget per year.

[Outis]

Bill Gates seems to have taken to asking people if they'd accept cutting foreign aid down to 5% of the budget per year.

I see what he did there.

[Outis]

However, I suspect we should cut obummercare, a LOT of foreign aid and earmarking first.

The ACA actually subtracts from the deficit, not adds to it. Earmarking has largely been banned. And Sam asked a very interesting question regarding foreign aid.

[Epoetker]

I want to see the DoD procurement program completely scrapped. I want to see it go from a pork-barrel process to a needs-based process. And frankly, if a base needs to be closed or serves no useful purpose, I don't want to have to continue to use that base because some joke of a Congress-critter whines about "My district will suffer!" Same with military contracts--if the DoD says they don't need an umpty-million dollar per unit platform, I don't want it rammed down their throats because some Congress-critter likes voting for pork for his district.

Are you then all right with the military violating the Quartering Act if they all of a sudden need to fight a war and all the bases have already been redeveloped? Procuring land to build a new base is way harder and way more costly than keeping a base open with a skeleton crew.

The A10 Warthog is fantastic, pays for itself with every mission, and is the all-around best form of realistically useful close-air support yet tested in the field, especially against an actual fighting enemy. Those proposing to scrap it need to have their own jobs scrapped and replaced with A-10 pilots:) Assuming that everything is going to be all drones and isolated terrorists is all well and good till somebody figures out exactly which data centers you're routing your Raytheon command and control network through.

[rogue06]

The A10 Warthog is fantastic, pays for itself with every mission, and is the all-around best form of realistically useful close-air support yet tested in the field, especially against an actual fighting enemy. Those proposing to scrap it need to have their own jobs scrapped and replaced with A-10 pilots:) Assuming that everything is going to be all drones and isolated terrorists is all well and good till somebody figures out exactly which data centers you're routing your Raytheon command and control network through.

IIRC the Pentagon fought building it tooth and nail and it has turned out to be an exceptional aircraft

[nickcopernicus]

How about we have General Dynamics absorb the 163 Billion dollars over budget that the X-35 has gotten? Maybe if the Military didn't do "cost plus" contracting, and instead, gave the companies x amount of money to get a job done, then the companies would have more of an incentive to stay on budget.

[Cow Poke]

How about we have General Dynamics absorb the 163 Billion dollars over budget that the X-35 has gotten? Maybe if the Military didn't do "cost plus" contracting, and instead, gave the companies x amount of money to get a job done, then the companies would have more of an incentive to stay on budget.

Or, like many projects, include an incentive for exceeding "on time / under budget", and a progressive penalty for "past time / over budget".

[Bill the Cat]

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...he-us-military

Source: US News

The American military is preparing to go under the knife, bracing for proposed cuts that would turn it into a force almost unrecognizable from its post-Cold War ancestor that endured roughly 13 years of protracted ground war in the Middle East.

Citing massive budget constraints at home, as well as growing and ill-defined threats across the globe, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel on Monday previewed the budget he will present to Congress next week that seeks to find more than $75 billion in immediate savings due to automatic cuts known as sequestration, on top of other planned defense spending cuts.

© Copyright Original Source

Your thoughts?

I am a contractor for the Army. It is going to cost a whole lot of jobs and put a huge amount of people on unemployment.

[Outis]

I am a contractor for the Army. It is going to cost a whole lot of jobs and put a huge amount of people on unemployment.

I know. And take a chunk of money out of the economy. But if it doesn't serve an actual military purpose, why are we doing it as part of the military? Why take the people's money through the government, instead of leaving it with the job creators?

[Bill the Cat]

How about we have General Dynamics absorb the 163 Billion dollars over budget that the X-35 has gotten? Maybe if the Military didn't do "cost plus" contracting, and instead, gave the companies x amount of money to get a job done, then the companies would have more of an incentive to stay on budget.

Many DOD contracts are becoming fixed price contracts instead of time and material ones.

[Sam]

I am a contractor for the Army. It is going to cost a whole lot of jobs and put a huge amount of people on unemployment.

That's the secondary effect of large deficit cuts, true enough. Ideally, draw-downs in military spending would come at times where private sector demand is high but full employment has yet to be reached.

—Sam

[Bill the Cat]

I know. And take a chunk of money out of the economy. But if it doesn't serve an actual military purpose, why are we doing it as part of the military? Why take the people's money through the government, instead of leaving it with the job creators?

Cutting it dramatically is far more damging than gradual reductions. If they want to reduce the amount of troops, slow down recruiting. Allow the GS force to retire earlier if they choose and offer lump sum packages instead of lifelong retirement benefits. A large chunk of the defense budget is for retiree benefits and pay.

[Sam]

Here's the breakdown of the Defense budget from 1962 to present. Veterans' benefits are not included, since they are technically not part of Defense spending and are located elsewhere on the budget (but account for 3.5% of the total):

[Carrikature]

Proposing spending cuts is always easy in the abstract, but actually finding substantial (so this excludes the normal whipping boys of Congressional pay and earmarks) sources of possible cuts is much easier said than done. I've long suspected the best thing to do would be to cut the military to more essential functions, privatize NASA, and end government sponsorship of the arts. This makes me popular with absolutely nobody.

It makes you popular with me, for whatever that's worth.

How about we have General Dynamics absorb the 163 Billion dollars over budget that the X-35 has gotten? Maybe if the Military didn't do "cost plus" contracting, and instead, gave the companies x amount of money to get a job done, then the companies would have more of an incentive to stay on budget.

Or to cut corners.

I am a contractor for the Army. It is going to cost a whole lot of jobs and put a huge amount of people on unemployment.

I have a hard time understanding how this is relevant. If we approach our economy with the focus of ensuring jobs for as many people as possible, we'd be better off letting the government hire everybody.