Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

You can’t have it both ways: “Defense cuts pose an economic quandary for liberals“

2 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Guest


Guest

Perhaps these liberals are incapable of understanding cause and effect. They want to spend oodles on entitlements and cut defense spending - spending that supports skilled labor and manufacturing. When you force a major cut it will impact the economy particularly in the nonentitlement sector like defense.

“Liberals are increasingly facing a conundrum as the Pentagon experiences the deepest cuts in a generation: The significant reductions in military spending that they have long sought are also taking a huge bite out of economic growth.
Liberal lawmakers and others on the left have argued for years that the military budget is bloated and should be dramatically scaled back. At the same time, they have been major advocates of government spending to help drive economic growth and create jobs. Fresh data on the state of the economy Friday showed that the two goals are coming into conflict. The economy grew only 2.5 percent in the first quarter, in large part because of a sharp 11.5 percent drop in military spending, and that came on top of an even bigger 22.1 percent plunge in military spending at the end of last year.
“It makes me feel torn,” said Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “The bottom line is military spending is government spending, and in the absence of any sort of other stimulus for the private sector, we need to get it where we can.”
Rest of story:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/defense-cuts-pose-an-economic-quandary-for-liberals/2013/04/28/6cc78b72-b01b-11e2-9a98-4be1688d7d84_story.html?hpid=z1

Sal

Sal

Shift the military spending into federal projects to improve our nation's crumbling infrastructure.

Poof!

Your conundrum just disappeared.

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:Shift the military spending into federal projects to improve our nation's crumbling infrastructure.

Poof!

Your conundrum just disappeared.

It's not my "conundrum". While it's very true infrastructure is woefully decrepit the types of jobs necessary to build bridges, upgrade electrical grids, improve water/sewer systems, etc don't translate well to the types of jobs or manufacturing processes found in weapons research, military aviation, or even building tanks (that Congress keeps buying when the Army doesn't want or need them). One solution is a total procurement process overhaul and ridding DoD of white elephant programs like the F-35. Keep programs as simple as necessary to face current threats. Then spend more on infrastructure programs. Just don't call them "shovel ready" programs, that lie still smells long after the fact.

2seaoat



One solution is a total procurement process overhaul

Bingo

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:Shift the military spending into federal projects to improve our nation's crumbling infrastructure.

Poof!

Your conundrum just disappeared.

POOF, the shovel ready jobs from 2009 in those areas never helped anything. That is a fact. If we can't have spending on the mil, how can you justify spending it elsewhere?

Guest


Guest

If we cannot afford spending on infrastructure, how can we justify spending that money on a military budget so bloated that even the Army is saying, please.....no more tanks....?

Guest


Guest

[quote="Willie"]If we cannot afford spending on infrastructure, how can we justify spending that money on a military budget so bloated that even the Army is saying, please.....no more tanks....?

[/quote

Oh I agree, but Congress wants votes and votes come from people making tanks in their district. It is why F-35 too big to fail.

Guest


Guest

[quote="PACEDOG#1"]
Willie wrote:If we cannot afford spending on infrastructure, how can we justify spending that money on a military budget so bloated that even the Army is saying, please.....no more tanks....?

[/quote

Oh I agree, but Congress wants votes and votes come from people making tanks in their district. It is why F-35 too big to fail.

Can't fail....just like the large banking institutions?...That theory has worked out well....

Guest


Guest

[quote="PACEDOG#1"]
Willie wrote:If we cannot afford spending on infrastructure, how can we justify spending that money on a military budget so bloated that even the Army is saying, please.....no more tanks....?

[/quote

Oh I agree, but Congress wants votes and votes come from people making tanks in their district. It is why F-35 too big to fail.

.......................................

So if the POTUS, by fiat, was to kill off the F-35 and the tank overage would that be OK by you and mouth boi...?

Or would it only give you more ammo to shoot at him...?

Guest


Guest

[quote="Willie"]
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Willie wrote:If we cannot afford spending on infrastructure, how can we justify spending that money on a military budget so bloated that even the Army is saying, please.....no more tanks....?

[/quote

Oh I agree, but Congress wants votes and votes come from people making tanks in their district. It is why F-35 too big to fail.

.......................................

So if the POTUS, by fiat, was to kill off the F-35 and the tank overage would that be OK by you and mouth boi...?

Or would it only give you more ammo to shoot at him...?

It won't be. Parts of it are made in all 50 states. Lockheed had their caca in one bag on this one.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum