Bush increases size, and pay, of military, with less % of GDP

[Train]

this is sorta old news (they been talking about it for a while) and it was signed by the Dub two weeks ago. I knew about the pay raise (IIRC this is the 5th pay raise for the military since Bush took office :thumbsup::thumbsup: ) however I just read the details and also appears that the size of the Army and Marine corps are increasing, which I was almost sure was going to get shot down. And im not entirely sure I agree with. Another thing that surprised me is that the Defense budget is now a smaller percentage of the GDP, which I thought would either stay the same or go up.

President Bush signed the $420.6 billion National Defense Authorization Act Oct. 28. The bill makes up 19.9 percent of the total fiscal 2005 federal budget and 3.6 percent of the gross domestic product. Last year, the percentages were 20.2 percent and 3.8 percent, respectively. The authorization act is the second of two bills that had to become law for the Defense Department to operate. The first is the Defense Appropriations Act, which the president signed into law Aug. 5. The appropriations act provides the money; the authorization act gives DoD the OK to spend it. The bill raises the end-strength level of the Army and Marine Corps by 20,000 and 3,000, respectively. Army end-strength will be set at 502,000; Marines, 178,000. In addition, the bill funds a 3.5 percent across-the-board pay raise for servicemembers and eliminates out-of-pocket expenses for housing by increasing the basic allowance for housing. The bill also makes permanent increases in hostile fire/imminent danger pay to $225 per month and in family separation pay to $250 per month. For more information, see this article

theres also a lot of other changes which are targeted at letting reservists and guard members recieve better benefits if they served certain amounts of active duty. Which is good, IMO. With the lengths of some reservists and guardsmen's deployments, they were sorta getting shafted by basically being active duty but without all the long term benefits.

 

[Steeplerot]

Bush increases size! I knew it was true, wow

 

[BAMAVOO]

Originally posted by: steeplerot
Bush increases size! I knew it was true, wow

That is so ignorant. The person too stupid to be president is John Kerry. Oh wait, John isn't president is he?

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: BAMAVOO

Originally posted by: steeplerot
Bush increases size! I knew it was true, wow

That is so ignorant. The person too stupid to be president is John Kerry. Oh wait, John isn't president is he?

Was that sarcasm? Weak.



Anyway, if this is true, great

:beer: <- 4Bush


Edit: He doesn't drink does he I guess he can have a instead.

 

[Zebo]

So they are saying he's spending more money while the economy is is the crapper. Yet the military gets even more redistrubitive wealth? This is good news how?

BTW the defence budget is twice what they say there.
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1253

Spend that much, employ that many, we got to use it. A lot, since peoples livlyhoods depend on it.

 

[Ldir]

That budget is smoke and mirrors because it does not include the cost of Iraq.

 

[smashp]

this is good news for soldiers, and for trimming costs at the DOD. I wonder if the DOD budget is down because of troops in Iraq and the costs associated with Iraq are paid with different moneies. If that is the case it actually makes it Cheaper for the DOD in a budgetary sence to be at war since they dont have to be concerned with the cost associated with those troops and equipment deployed

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: steeplerot
Bush increases size! I knew it was true, wow

He's gonna draft your butt. Better practice ducking! Whining alone won't save you.

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: Zebo
So they are saying he's spending more money while the economy is is the crapper. Yet the military gets even more redistrubitive wealth? This is good news how?

BTW the defence budget is twice what they say there.
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1253

Spend that much, employ that many, we got to use it. A lot, since peoples livlyhoods depend on it.

In your spare time, I would suggest some econ courses.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Zebo
So they are saying he's spending more money while the economy is is the crapper.

how do you figure less % of GDP is more money?

Yet the military gets even more redistrubitive wealth? This is good news how?

you act like giving a raise to troops is some conspiracy, and that they dont deserve it, what is the problem here?

BTW the defence budget is twice what they say there.
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1253

the whoel article is based on the premise

Many other agencies, such as the Department of Justice and the Department of Transportation, also spend money in pursuit of homeland security.

you want the Department of Justice to be put under the DOD? bad Idea, and I think most americans would flip out if you told them the supreme court now reports to the Pentagon

Spend that much, employ that many, we got to use it. A lot, since peoples livlyhoods depend on it.

:thumbsup:

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

OK, then here's a handy way to increase the pay of the military with no change in the budget at all:

Cancell ALL Welfare programs and give the money to military personnel. Screw the lazy layabouts, give the cash to people who EARN it!

Jason

Originally posted by: Zebo
So they are saying he's spending more money while the economy is is the crapper. Yet the military gets even more redistrubitive wealth? This is good news how?

BTW the defence budget is twice what they say there.
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1253

Spend that much, employ that many, we got to use it. A lot, since peoples livlyhoods depend on it.

 

[GrGr]

Originally posted by: Zebo
So they are saying he's spending more money while the economy is is the crapper. Yet the military gets even more redistrubitive wealth? This is good news how?

BTW the defence budget is twice what they say there.
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1253

Spend that much, employ that many, we got to use it. A lot, since peoples livlyhoods depend on it.

Spend that much, employ that many, we got to use it. A lot, since peoples livlyhoods depend on it.

And that is the crux of the matter. The US has chosen to use War as means to Justify the military industrial complex, the military budget, military employment etc. It is not War for Peace. It is War for the National Economy.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Zebo
BTW the defence budget is twice what they say there.
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1253

That budget is smoke and mirrors because it does not include the cost of Iraq.

 

[drewshin]

sounds good to me. but what did they cut out? also what were the numbers in 2002?

 

[MidasKnight]

:thumbsup:

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: GrGr
Spend that much, employ that many, we got to use it. A lot, since peoples livlyhoods depend on it.

And that is the crux of the matter. The US has chosen to use War as means to Justify the military industrial complex, the military budget, military employment etc. It is not War for Peace. It is War for the National Economy.

If we're not spending money on manufacturing (i.e. missiles, hummers and such for war), then the money will get spent on research. It's going to get spent either way.

Personally, I've been wondering if our readiness to blow tons of money on our military hasn't contributed to us becoming the superpower both financially and militarily.