It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
US congressmen Barney Frank (D-Mass) and Ron Paul (R-Texas) are urging their fellow lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to push for cuts in military spending.
The congressmen drafted a letter to US President Barack Obama’s Commission on Deficit Reduction calling for a $1 trillion dollar reduction in US military spending. Currently the letter has ten co-signatories, but they are seeking more.
One area of cuts targeted is contract spending. Wolff argued that it is very realistic to cut contract spending and the government should consider doing so. Contract spending is often lavish and unneeded. Some expenses in military essential, but not all, he argued.
In addition to contractor cuts, cutting old Cold War era policies and programs would also save money. The US government still spends millions every year to get ready for "mythical war" in Eastern Europe that is no longer necessary to prepare for.
Originally posted by Moonsouljah
Frank and Paul clearly hate our troops. Why else would they propose this? They want to admit defeat in the face of the enemy clearly. I say triple military spending and don't stop till we kill every last bad guy. After all, they hate our freedoms. USA!!
The U.S. Department of Defense budget accounted in fiscal year 2010 for about 19% of the United States federal budgeted expenditures and 28% of estimated tax revenues. Including non-DOD expenditures, defense spending was approximately 25–29% of budgeted expenditures and 38–44% of estimated tax revenues. According to the Congressional Budget Office, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000–2009.[18]
Because of constitutional limitations, military funding is appropriated in a discretionary spending account. (Such accounts permit government planners to have more flexibility to change spending each year, as opposed to mandatory spending accounts that mandate spending on programs in accordance with the law, outside of the budgetary process.) In recent years, discretionary spending as a whole has amounted to about one-third of total federal outlays.[19] Military spending's share of discretionary spending was 50.5% in 2003, and has risen steadily ever since.[20]
For FY 2010, Department of Defense spending amounts to 4.7% of GDP.[21] Because the U.S. GDP has risen over time, the military budget can rise in absolute terms while shrinking as a percentage of the GDP. For example, the Department of Defense budget is slated to be $664 billion in 2010 (including the cost of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan previously funded through supplementary budget legislation[22][23]), higher than at any other point in American history, but still 1.1–1.4% lower as a percentage of GDP than the amount spent on defense during the peak of Cold-War military spending in the late 1980s.[21] Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has called four percent an "absolute floor".[24] This calculation does not take into account some other defense-related non-DOD spending, such as Veterans Affairs, Homeland Security, and interest paid on debt incurred in past wars, which has increased even as a percentage of the national GDP.
en.wikipedia.org...
Frank and Paul clearly hate our troops. Why else would they propose this? They want to admit defeat in the face of the enemy clearly. I say triple military spending and don't stop till we kill every last bad guy. After all, they hate our freedoms. USA!!
Originally posted by Moonsouljah
Frank and Paul clearly hate our troops. Why else would they propose this? They want to admit defeat in the face of the enemy clearly. I say triple military spending and don't stop till we kill every last bad guy. After all, they hate our freedoms. USA!!