American Military Budget.. $1.2 trillion.?

Read this article that totaled up the projected budget for 2012..

http://www.alternet.org/world/150086/$1.2_trillion:_the_real_u.s._national_security_budget_no_one_wants_you_to_know_about?page=entire

This is way higher than what is officially commented on... Does the article have any basis? That's an incredible amount of money..

Manic Moran

Yes, but there's also a lot of overlap. Anything related to national security on that list is being added to the tally, much of which would be spent even if the military did not even exist. Even the title of the article says 'National Security', not 'military'. For example, if the Federal Government were to abolish the Army tomorrow, the pensions of the veterans would still have to be paid. (Same as if the Feds abolished the Dept of Health, Dept of Education, or any othe such department). Similarly, domestic law enforcement operations (Customs and Border Patrol, FBI counter-espionage and counter-terrorism) which would fill the DHS and DOJ billing under the Homeland Defence category (I wish they'd change the name on that) are being added to the tally.

The US certainly does spend a lot of money on security, but much of it would be spent even without the military. The military has its job, the other arms of government have their job. Both have overlap under national security. It's not as if the figures are being hidden, for example, the DOJ figures being added to that list are presumably taken from the DOJ's budget, and nobody seems to be complaining about the DOJ spending money on national security. They only complain when they can somehow, even if tenuously, link it to the military. To use the guy's restaurant bill analogy, he's saying he's shocked when he offers to pay for his partner's desert and his bill comes to something higher than the cost of the food he ate himself. But total dollar value and type of food consumed hasn't changed from what he saw on the table.

NTM

Fallschirmjager

this is from the business insider. as you can see they have a problem and cutting defense will not solve it...

its an old target that the defense dept is some magical place where all the money goes no longer applies.




here is the whole article

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-only-chart-you-need-to-see-to-understand-why-the-us-is-screwed-2011-2

BluePlanet

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yes, but there's also a lot of overlap. Anything related to national security on that list is being added to the tally, much of which would be spent even if the military did not even exist. Even the title of the article says 'National Security', not 'military'. For example, if the Federal Government were to abolish the Army tomorrow, the pensions of the veterans would still have to be paid.

The US certainly does spend a lot of money on security, but much of it would be spent even without the military.
NTM

Can you show some examples where that "overlap" as you say, occurs in the other direction?
For example, can you show us where the Defense budget is paying for programs designed for ordinary citizens?

BluePlanet

Fallschirmjager wrote: »

this is from the business insider. as you can see they have a problem and cutting defense will not solve it...

its an old target that the defense dept is some magical place where all the money goes no longer applies.

You do realize that Social Security is money that has already been collected at the paycheck?
And that successive US administrations have been dipping into that money to pay for other pursuits, and leaving IOU's instead.

Claiming that SS is part of the deficit problem is not true.
The fund is well funded and can pay it's benefits for over 25 years.
Social Security is self-financed by payroll tax contributions, separate from the rest of the budget, and has not created the current fiscal mess.

Fallschirmjager

social security is in the red this year...


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/5/social-security-red-first-time-ever/


good point on the IOU's, and yes i am aware of them which is why i dont think big govt is ever the answer. And i am also aware regardless of party lines they have dipped into the funds, which is again exactly why i dont support big govt. a pot of gold like that is too much for politicians to ignore, no matter how honest they are or which party they are from. In fact if i recall correctly, it was exactly this point the founders warned against and why the federal govt should be small and very limited to a small number of areas like defense and external relations.

Denerick

This thread alone explains why the Republican Party, and their voters, are a pack of intellectual cowards, hiding behind useful social programmes (And arguably more important to US interests) and foreign aid, which is often a form of bilateral control given the resources of the US.

If they want to cut stuff from the budget, then start with the military. This ultra nationalism, this jingoism, this flag waving bollox is incomprehendable to the rest of the world, do you lot know that?

BluePlanet

Fallschirmjager wrote: »

social security is in the red this year...


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/5/social-security-red-first-time-ever/

I think that article is really making a point about the current state of joblessness.
Later in article it says (about the SS deficit):

"The deficit will last through 2011, then an improving economy will put it back into balance for three years, then it will dip back into the red in 2015, the actuary said. The program has enough money in its trust fund to cover the annual deficit for two decades beyond that."

Anyway, the point of my post was not about whether SS is well funded or not.
It's that you are using it as an example of extracurriular "entitlements" and suggesting it's something that needs to be cut. While i am stating that infact, those entitlements have already been paid for and should be omitted from your graph.

Fallschirmjager

you are absolutely right...except it was not supposed to hit any red ink until 2030....

Manic Moran

BluePlanet wrote: »

Can you show some examples where that "overlap" as you say, occurs in the other direction?
For example, can you show us where the Defense budget is paying for programs designed for ordinary citizens?

It doesn't take too much looking, the main benefits are from R&D. Predator drones owned by Border Patrol, trauma surgery or prosthetic technology used to deal with civilian accidents, for example. And you have side-effects such as economies of scale. The defense budget keeps the shipyards in business, which means that the cost of, say, new coast guard cutters is also less. By law, direct US military involvement (Outside of the National Guard) in domestic law enforcement is prohibited, but the Air Force seems to be doing a reasonable job aiding US citizen's interests in getting out of Libya, and the Navy's had the occasional success against piracy, helping the civilian economy there. During the Tanker War, much of the world's oil was escorted out of the Gulf by the US military, helping keep prices down and supply up.

And, of course, there's the training. Where do many of those air ambulance pilots or police pilots learn to fly? I've got troopers getting their commercial driver's licenses on te Army's tab. And so on.

NTM

BluePlanet

Manic Moran wrote: »

It doesn't take too much looking, the main benefits are from R&D. Predator drones owned by Border Patrol, trauma surgery or prosthetic technology used to deal with civilian accidents, for example. And you have side-effects such as economies of scale. The defense budget keeps the shipyards in business, which means that the cost of, say, new coast guard cutters is also less. By law, direct US military involvement (Outside of the National Guard) in domestic law enforcement is prohibited, but the Air Force seems to be doing a reasonable job aiding US citizen's interests in getting out of Libya, and the Navy's had the occasional success against piracy, helping the civilian economy there. During the Tanker War, much of the world's oil was escorted out of the Gulf by the US military, helping keep prices down and supply up.

And, of course, there's the training. Where do many of those air ambulance pilots or police pilots learn to fly? I've got troopers getting their commercial driver's licenses on te Army's tab. And so on.

NTM

Not quite the same tho. All those "overlaps" you mention are incidental and to be honest, a bit of stretch.
The Tanker war?

When Pzifer or some other private corporation invent via their own R&D some medical benefit, that benefit overlaps into Veteran care as well.
Commercial flight schools are a plenty. But i'll bet Air Force pilots are actually destorying their market.

There are entire big budget programs, that are really exclusively military programs that carry no benefit to ordinary people. Yet are not funded by the Defense Dept. There really is no comparable program in the other direction.

Btw, the military are regular users of the Public highway, which is a Dept of Transport (non-military) program.

Overheal

Denerick wrote: »

This thread alone explains why the Republican Party, and their voters, are a pack of intellectual cowards, hiding behind useful social programmes (And arguably more important to US interests) and foreign aid, which is often a form of bilateral control given the resources of the US.

If they want to cut stuff from the budget, then start with the military. This ultra nationalism, this jingoism, this flag waving bollox is incomprehendable to the rest of the world, do you lot know that?

What I dont understand is why you want to cut the Defense budget and not the Pyramid Scheme.

Denerick

Overheal wrote: »

What I dont understand is why you want to cut the Defense budget and not the Pyramid Scheme.

I don't understand why health costs aren't completely reviewed and dealt with accordingly (The Obama plan is basically the Republican plan from the mid 90s, yet once you get the demagogues exploiting the idiocy of the masses you're obviously going to end up with Obama getting compared to Stalin and Hitler... Anyway...)

Social Security also needs to be adressed. Pensions are going to be a huge problem across the western world as the boomers retire. Open door immigration has always seemed to me to be the most logical solution to the problem of a greying population. But of course the demagogues have long been at work in this sphere too, poisoning the political and intellectual atmosphere, and once again exploiting the ignocrance and idiocy of the masses...

Manic Moran

BluePlanet wrote: »

Not quite the same tho. All those "overlaps" you mention are incidental and to be honest, a bit of stretch.

Yes, they're incidental, but no, they're not a stretch. As an aside, I completely forgot about the one federal military agency which is routinely used domestically, the US Army Corps of Engineers which, at 34,000 personel, is the world's largest public works agency.

The Tanker war?

1984-88. Any ship transiting the Persian Gulf could be targetted. Over 300 of the ships attacked (almost 2/3) were tankers. Both Soviet and US Naval vessels were used to escort them. Both Soviet and US naval vessels were attacked whilst doing so.

When Pzifer or some other private corporation invent via their own R&D some medical benefit, that benefit overlaps into Veteran care as well.

True. But, again, you have the sheer dollar value being thrown into it, which is quite likely to be higher. Ask Airbus their opinion on the US Government's 'subsidising of Boeing' in its commercial aircraft market by way of military contract.

Commercial flight schools are a plenty. But i'll bet Air Force pilots are actually destorying their market.

And public schools destroy the market for private schools. Yet people rarely complain about the money being thrown at education by the government. In effect, it's a form of education subsidy. The individual is not directly paying for his own education, so if it's by way of government grant to pay a private school, or public purse to pay for a government school, much of the effect overall is the same.

There are entire big budget programs, that are really exclusively military programs that carry no benefit to ordinary people. Yet are not funded by the Defense Dept. There really is no comparable program in the other direction.

According to that article, there's billions of dollars involved in such. Unless you can explain how the payment of pensions for retired veterans carries benefit to ordinary people. At the larger level, there is likely some form of trickle-down effect even if we don't know it at the time. DARPA probably didn't think that people like you or I would be chatting on UBB boards.ie when they started funding that IP Network thingy.

Btw, the military are regular users of the Public highway, which is a Dept of Transport (non-military) program.

The full name for the Interstate highway system is "Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways." True, it is not paid for out of the military budget, but it was awfully handy that it was considered militarily important to help it get built in the first place so that we all could use them.

NTM