Conservatives: Should our defense budget be on the chopping block?

[Wreckem]

Defense can be cut some. Although as a percentage of the total federal budget it is much smaller than entitlement programs. Especially when look at future projections.

Its well known at the current rate and the aging population SS/Medicare + Debt Payments will exceed the entire federal budget by the mid 30's if not sooner.

Those long term projections are skewed because Medicare is unfunded to the tune for $40-60trillion. Neither side wants to seriously talk about Medicare and Healthcare.

Not to mention, Social Security shouldn't be included in those projections because the Govt has raided TRILLIONS from Social Security over the past 3 decades. Not to mention the money spent on the excessive increases to military spending over the last decade would have easily paid back the money owed to the SSA, the ~$2.5trillion of the national debt that belongs to the Social Security Trust Fund.

But that $900billion in military spending can be cut "some." Military spending has became corporate welfare for defense contractors. It needs to be cut by at least 50%.

 

[piasabird]

I think SS and Medicare should also be on the chopping block along with all the other welfare programs.

 

[Texashiker]

I think SS and Medicare should also be on the chopping block along with all the other welfare programs.

Why would SS and medicare be a "welfare" program?

 

[piasabird]

New York State/city went into default in the 1970's. What makes you think the same kind of spending by the Federal Government will have different results?

 

[piasabird]

SS and Medicaid is a Ponzy Scheme. We are borrowing so much money at the current time that our ability to borrow will dry up long before 2033! I doubt our ability to borrow money will last another 10 years.

 

[Texashiker]

New York State/city went into default in the 1970's. What makes you think the same kind of spending by the Federal Government will have different results?

New york city and new york state do not control the printing presses.

If the federal government looks like it is going to run out of money, just print more money.

SS and Medicaid is a Ponzy Scheme.

SS and medicaid/medicare would be fine if the federal government would stop taking money from the programs.

 

[cwjerome]

I have proposed a 50% cut to the defense budget followed with a 30% cut to social services.

Disastrous... for us and the world. Not that much.

The biggest challenge for the military is pay, medical, and retirement. Those 3 are soaking up a huge % and only getting worse. If you want to tackle the meat of the defense budget you need to deal with those. I do support cutting the payroll, freezing pay for a few years, and reforming the current pension system... not an overly popular position to be in for a military guy, but it's needed. I'm not even sure what do do about the skyrocketing medical costs, but something needs to be done.

 

[Wreckem]

New York State/city went into default in the 1970's. What makes you think the same kind of spending by the Federal Government will have different results?

Social Security would be fully paid for through 2060 or beyond if the government didn't raid and spend the money.

Medicare on the other hand is the single largest problem facing the american people. We have got to seriously address medical costs in this country. Not insurance costs, not universal health insurance but ACTUAL healthcare costs, what it costs for exams, procedures, etc.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

That chart is so full of crap, as long as the federal reserve can print money out of thin air, we have nothing to worry about.

Need more money? No problem, lets work those printing presses 24/7/365. Still not printing enough money, buy some more presses and hire more people.

I hope you're kidding. You ever hear of hyperinflation? Germany tried your approach and burned their money to keep warm in the winter.

More recently, Zimbabwe tried your approach and now use their currency to wipe their ass.

 

[lothar]

Yes or no.

You claim to be fiscally conservative and run your mouth about how PBS and NASA are bankrupting this country, while ignoring the single biggest culprit and contributor to our deficit...our military defense budget.

Absolutely.
Nothing should be immune from the meat axe cleaver.

 

[Texashiker]

I hope you're kidding. You ever hear of hyperinflation? Germany tried your approach and burned their money to keep warm in the winter.

No, I am not kidding.

Yes, I know what hyper inflation is.

Here is an example of what I was referring to, in 2009 the federal reserve "injected" 1 trillion into the economy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/business/economy/19fed.html

Where did that money come from? What was that money backed up with? What is supporting the currency for the federal reserve to inject a trillion here, a trillion there,,,, and so on.

Need another trillion? No problem, here ya go.

 

[spidey07]

Well that makes it 100 percent conservatives can support cutting any and all spending. Thread backfire.

 

[monovillage]

It's worth mentioning that the bulk of conservatives on ATP&N are more of the libertarian type, meaning a couple things. First off, socially conservative views are somewhat rare here. Second, many will support things like scaling back the military.

These conservatives, however, are not a representative sampling of American conservatives.

- wolf

A very good and accurate observation. !!

 

[Genx87]

Disastrous... for us and the world. Not that much.

The biggest challenge for the military is pay, medical, and retirement. Those 3 are soaking up a huge % and only getting worse. If you want to tackle the meat of the defense budget you need to deal with those. I do support cutting the payroll, freezing pay for a few years, and reforming the current pension system... not an overly popular position to be in for a military guy, but it's needed. I'm not even sure what do do about the skyrocketing medical costs, but something needs to be done.

I think we can survive on a 350 billion\year military budget. Bring home a lot of troops and close the hundreds of bases we have around the world. Let the world fund their own defense for crying out loud. In exchange for this lop off 30% of our social spending and we will return to a surplus in our budget.

I ask the OP would he allow for a 30% cut or any cut to the social side of spending in the budget?

 

[the DRIZZLE]

SS and medicaid/medicare would be fine if the federal government would stop taking money from the programs.

No, they wouldn't. Even if you pretend that the trust funds are real they still are not solvent.

 

[lothar]

Social Security would be fully paid for through 2060 or beyond if the government didn't raid and spend the money.

Medicare on the other hand is the single largest problem facing the american people. We have got to seriously address medical costs in this country. Not insurance costs, not universal health insurance but ACTUAL healthcare costs, what it costs for exams, procedures, etc.

What if our population reaches a plateau like Germany and Japan or God forbid, starts dropping?
Social Security seems to depend on population growth more than anything else.
In the 1960's, there was 17 people paying into the Social Security system for every person taking out. Ratio of 17:1
I think the number today is closer to a 1:1 ratio than the 17:1 ratio we've had in the past.

 

[lothar]

SS and medicaid/medicare would be fine if the federal government would stop taking money from the programs.

Keep thinking that to yourself.
You must be a baby boomer, so you have no worries.

 

[Wreckem]

Disastrous... for us and the world. Not that much.

The biggest challenge for the military is pay, medical, and retirement. Those 3 are soaking up a huge % and only getting worse. If you want to tackle the meat of the defense budget you need to deal with those. I do support cutting the payroll, freezing pay for a few years, and reforming the current pension system... not an overly popular position to be in for a military guy, but it's needed. I'm not even sure what do do about the skyrocketing medical costs, but something needs to be done.

We have approx the same # of active duty personnel as we did 10 years ago. But the salary outlays for them have doubled.

We have more than doubled procurement spending. We have doubled R&D. And we have more than tripled operation and maintenance spending.

 

[Wreckem]

What if our population reaches a plateau like Germany and Japan or God forbid, starts dropping?
Social Security seems to depend on population growth more than anything else.
In the 1960's, there was 17 people paying into the Social Security system for every person taking out. Ratio of 17:1
I think the number today is closer to a 1:1 ratio than the 17:1 ratio we've had in the past.

See thats the thing Lothar. Social Security would have been fully funded through a for a long long time if Reagan and every other President & Congress since then didn't raid the Social Security Trust Fund. Social Security was posting huge surpluses for the majority 3 decades(to a tune of ~$2.5trillion), but the Government spent all that money and replaced them with IOUs.

What you mention only matters because of the raiding. If the raiding of the surpluses didn't happen. Social Security would be fine.

 

[Mursilis]

Not to mention, Social Security shouldn't be included in those projections because the Govt has raided TRILLIONS from Social Security over the past 3 decades. Not to mention the money spent on the excessive increases to military spending over the last decade would have easily paid back the money owed to the SSA, the ~$2.5trillion of the national debt that belongs to the Social Security Trust Fund.

That whole "trust fund" silliness was and is just an accounting trick. Legally, SS taxes have been part of general revenue, just like most other taxes. Of course it was going to get spent. The whole "trust fund" flim-flam was just to fool the rubes. Once money goes to the gov't, it's gone.

 

[Wreckem]

No, they wouldn't. Even if you pretend that the trust funds are real they still are not solvent.

They should be real. People paid a mandatory retirement tax for decades, and then Reagan et al decided to raid the SS surplus to cover his massive spending increases in the 1980s. Then every President and Congress since have pilfered the surpluses to a tune of roughly $2.5trillion. Technically the trust fund is real, the problem is it just made up of treasury bonds which can only be paid back by general revenue at this point.

SS would have been fine if its surpluses weren't raided for 30 years.

Medicare how was never fine. And no one seems to care about its $40-60trillion in unfunded liabilites over the next 4-5 decades. People use SS as a red herring to avoid talking about the real issue. SS is chump change. The US government could have paid back the SS Trust Fund over the past decade if we didn't spend insane amounts on military spending.

 

[Mursilis]

See thats the thing Lothar. Social Security would have been fully funded through a for a long long time if Reagan and every other President & Congress since then didn't raid the Social Security Trust Fund. Social Security was posting huge surpluses for the majority 3 decades(to a tune of ~$2.5trillion), but the Government spent all that money and replaced them with IOUs.

What you mention only matters because of the raiding. If the raiding of the surpluses didn't happen. Social Security would be fine.

Read up:
http://www.ssa.gov/history/nestor.html

 

[Wreckem]

That whole "trust fund" silliness was and is just an accounting trick. Legally, SS taxes have been part of general revenue, just like most other taxes. Of course it was going to get spent. The whole "trust fund" flim-flam was just to fool the rubes. Once money goes to the gov't, it's gone.

Its not really flim flam. The Trust fund has $2.5trillion in treasury bonds... And no, it hasn't always been added to the general revenue pot. That didn't start to 1983. It was changed to lessen Reagans deficit spending.

 

[Mursilis]

SS would have been fine if its surpluses weren't raided for 30 years.

No, it was still going to crash - it was paying most people far more in benefits than they ever paid in contributions. That's unsustainable.

http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/social-security-medicare-benefits-over-lifetime.pdf

 

[Wreckem]

Read up:
http://www.ssa.gov/history/nestor.html

WTF is your point? Yes Congress can change stuff at anytime. They will also be voted out if they do so.

Its another red herring argument. The fact of the matter is starting in 1983 the Govt started spending Social Security surpluses, mainly for massive deficit spending to increase defense spending(sound familar?). The government then continued to use Social Security Surpluses for another 28 years until it no longer ran a surplus.

Call the trust fund what you will, but it is in fact roughly $2.5trillion in treasury bonds.

Congress may not have a legal obligation but they do have a moral obligation. One that will get there ass thrown out if they mess with social security.

To compare, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will cost $3-5trillion in total costs. Were they worth it?

Medicare is again an entirely different issue. And really its not medicare that is the issue its out of control rise in healthcare costs. And no universal healthcare is not the answer(that just leads to an even bigger unfunded liability).

And again SS is chump change. $2.5trillion in extra spending over 40 years is nothing. We spent that or more in the past 10 on increased military spending.