Military Spending is more important than Entitlement Spending

[Jacobtm]

If something has to be cut, it should be...

[krazen1211]

Well, that was the position of Democrats at one time.

[Wonkish1]

Well just to point out a pretty good portion of Military spending is simultaneously entitlement spending. Not saying it should be removed, but just pointing there is considerable overlap.

GI Bill, VA, retiree pensions, retiree health benefits, etc. and this does represent a decent chunk of spending on defense, military, and veterans.


The point is that you wont be able to cut one or the other. You're eventually going to have to cut a lot from both. And if you are actually caring about the issue you will do it soon and do it for future retirees so you don't have to screw people over down the road.

[Lief 🗽]

Apples and oranges. Military spending is a short-term problem, entitlement spending (well, really healthcare spending, social security is pretty easy to fix and not really in very deep trouble anyway) is a long-term problem.

[fezzyfestoon]

Apples and oranges. Military spending is a short-term problem, entitlement spending (well, really healthcare spending, social security is pretty easy to fix and not really in very deep trouble anyway) is a long-term problem.

Is it though? It's been decades of military excess. Basically since Eisenhower warned of it, we've gobbled up money in the name of the military like it was going out of style. Only it hasn't, it's become more popular. Now we're basically stuck in a number of countries that I don't see a way out of. I'd sure like to see it be short-term, but when is it really going to change? Who is really going to change it?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Well, that was the position of Democrats at one time.

A position which the party has since corrected.

[LastVoter]

Well, that was the position of Democrats at one time.

A position which the party has since corrected.

Unless they have large military installations in their districts.

[Wonkish1]

Now we're basically stuck in a number of countries that I don't see a way out of. I'd sure like to see it be short-term, but when is it really going to change? Who is really going to change it?

I see a way out of Iraq. The war is practically won. The country is now safer then Brazil and the Olympics are going there.

[fezzyfestoon]

Now we're basically stuck in a number of countries that I don't see a way out of. I'd sure like to see it be short-term, but when is it really going to change? Who is really going to change it?

I see a way out of Iraq. The war is practically won. The country is now safer then Brazil and the Olympics are going there.

Afghanistan used to be pretty safe, too. Japan are Germany are very safe. There certainly are logical ways out, but there are no real ways out. Politics forbid that. There are lot of things that should and easily could be done by the US that aren't and won't be for reasons with no basis in sensibility or reality.

[Wonkish1]

Now we're basically stuck in a number of countries that I don't see a way out of. I'd sure like to see it be short-term, but when is it really going to change? Who is really going to change it?

I see a way out of Iraq. The war is practically won. The country is now safer then Brazil and the Olympics are going there.

Afghanistan used to be pretty safe, too. Japan are Germany are very safe. There certainly are logical ways out, but there are no real ways out. Politics forbid that. There are lot of things that should and easily could be done by the US that aren't and won't be for reasons with no basis in sensibility or reality.

Well expensive combat operations in Iraq are over. Unless the United States actually tries to cutback recruitment you have to base them somewhere. And it really doesn't matter if that is in the US or outside of the US except outside the US comes with more strategic benefits. At least that is what I'm referring to in the cases of Japan and Germany. If the same thing were to happen in Iraq it is really a non issue. All that matters is that costly operations cease.

If you want to look into policy that attempts to cutback on military personnel in general, I may be open to it as a way of cost containment. But unless your willing to back that then it really matters little if we base people in Georgia or Okinawa.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Well, that was the position of Democrats at one time.

A position which the party has since corrected.

Unless they have large military installations in their districts.

True. : /

[Jacobtm]

I see a way out of Iraq. The war is practically won. The country is now safer then Brazil and the Olympics are going there.

You are a maniac.

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/gpi-data/#/2011/scor

Iraq is among the most violent countries in the world, precisely because the United States invaded and people are resisting foreign occupation.

[Wonkish1]

Well, that was the position of Democrats at one time.

A position which the party has since corrected.

Unless they have large military installations in their districts.

Another reason why overseas bases are preferable over domestic ones.

[Wonkish1]

I see a way out of Iraq. The war is practically won. The country is now safer then Brazil and the Olympics are going there.

Good joke

What you don't think so? Iraq is pretty damn safe today. I would feel a lot safer as an Iraqi in most parts of Iraq then a Brazilian in the Favellas.

And if you compare it to Mexico its not even close. Granted as a white American I feel safer in Mexico than I even do in certain parts of the US, but if I were a Mexican I would be pretty scared anytime I went out. If I were an Iraqi I wouldn't be too concerned going out in Iraq.

[fezzyfestoon]

Now we're basically stuck in a number of countries that I don't see a way out of. I'd sure like to see it be short-term, but when is it really going to change? Who is really going to change it?

I see a way out of Iraq. The war is practically won. The country is now safer then Brazil and the Olympics are going there.

Afghanistan used to be pretty safe, too. Japan are Germany are very safe. There certainly are logical ways out, but there are no real ways out. Politics forbid that. There are lot of things that should and easily could be done by the US that aren't and won't be for reasons with no basis in sensibility or reality.

Well expensive combat operations in Iraq are over. Unless the United States actually tries to cutback recruitment you have to base them somewhere. And it really doesn't matter if that is in the US or outside of the US except outside the US comes with more strategic benefits. At least that is what I'm referring to in the cases of Japan and Germany. If the same thing were to happen in Iraq it is really a non issue. All that matters is that costly operations cease.

If you want to look into policy that attempts to cutback on military personnel in general, I may be open to it as a way of cost containment. But unless your willing to back that then it really matters little if we base people in Georgia or Okinawa.

Oh yeah, I should have said that first. There should be massive reductions in personnel as well as R&D and basically all major operations. Obviously there are parts of the military that are extremely vital and some that are strategically important. But for the most part we've really got our resources pouring in too many directions, especially with regards to the military. We should keep bases, but not at the extreme scale we do now.

[Jacobtm]

And if you compare it to Mexico its not even close. Granted as a white American I feel safer in Mexico than I even do in certain parts of the US, but if I were a Mexican I would be pretty scared anytime I went out. If I were an Iraqi I wouldn't be too concerned going out in Iraq.

You are completely ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index

Iraq is at the very bottom of the peace index, the second least peaceful country in the world. Mexico and Brazil, while dangerous, are not even in the bottom 20%. Brazil is about average, and has improved in recent years, while Mexico is more dangerous than Brazil, and has become more dangerous in recent years. Iraq has actually become more dangerous over time. Look at measures besides U.S. military deaths and you'd see that.

Do you know anyone in Mexico or Brazil? Have you visited either country? I have lived in Mexico and have many friends there, and also in Brazil. People there live their lives as normal. Yes there is troubling violence, but it comes nowhere near Iraq.

Crazy that you think Iraq is a peaceful country. It's only kept out of the least peaceful spot by Somalia. It beats Sudan, North Korea and Afghanistan.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Both should be cut, but the military is a core function of government, and so is more important, and also entitlements are a larger portion of the budget.

[Wonkish1]

And if you compare it to Mexico its not even close. Granted as a white American I feel safer in Mexico than I even do in certain parts of the US, but if I were a Mexican I would be pretty scared anytime I went out. If I were an Iraqi I wouldn't be too concerned going out in Iraq.

You are completely ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index

Iraq is at the very bottom of the peace index, the second least peaceful country in the world. Mexico and Brazil, while dangerous, are not even in the bottom 20%. Brazil is about average, and has improved in recent years, while Mexico is more dangerous than Brazil, and has become more dangerous in recent years. Iraq has actually become more dangerous over time. Look at measures besides U.S. military deaths and you'd see that.

Do you know anyone in Mexico or Brazil? Have you visited either country? I have lived in Mexico and have many friends there, and also in Brazil. People there live their lives as normal. Yes there is troubling violence, but it comes nowhere near Iraq.

Crazy that you think Iraq is a peaceful country. It's only kept out of the least peaceful spot by Somalia. It beats Sudan, North Korea and Afghanistan.

You really like to embarrass yourself don't you? Global Peace Index takes into account "friendliness towards neighbors", "expenditure on military", "number of police and security", etc. That is just stupid.

The fact is that civilian deaths are down to about 140 a month for the entire country. That is lower than certain states in the United States(although the presence of other crime in Iraq I wouldn't call Iraq "safer").

Here is a link to actual homicide rates in the world.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/10/homicide-rates

and here
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/10/world-murder-rate-unodc

Here are the 10 most dangerous cities in the world according to one source
http://urbantitan.com/10-most-dangerous-cities-in-the-world-in-2011/
and a different one
http://laikepo.blogspot.com/2011/01/top-10-world-most-dangerous-cities.html

Man you don't like making yourself look good do you?



Edit: To answer your question. I have spent a decent amount of time visiting Mexico even recently. I do feel extremely safe in Mexico(maybe not as much in the border towns) as a white American. I probably would be a lot more nervous travelling to Mexico if I was a Latino.

[Link]

Well just to point out a pretty good portion of Military spending is simultaneously entitlement spending.

This.


I love it.  Third post of the thread someone pointed out the elephant in the room.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Just as an FYI, the reason that Afghanistan and Irag are "unsafe" today is in no small measure due to American foreign policy during the Cold War.

[Wonkish1]

Just as an FYI, the reason that Afghanistan and Irag are "unsafe" today is in no small measure due to American foreign policy during the Cold War.

Partially true in the case of Afghanistan, but not really true in the case of Iraq. Granted there was the Iran/Iraq war, but I really don't understand how that the absence of our tiny involvement would have changed anything.

[Free Palestine]

I tend to think the welfare of the American people is more important than our capacity to dick around the rest of the world.

[Yelnoc]

Which is stronger, the carrot or the stick?

[nclib]

I tend to think the welfare of the American people is more important than our capacity to dick around the rest of the world.

Agreed. And it's not even clear that U.S. military spending helps natives of Iraq, Vietnam, etc.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I want to see everything cut. Defense comes first for cuts though.