Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LP2K12

(885 posts)
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 01:42 PM Nov 2012

Deficit cutters look to Defense Dept. budget

Source: Military Times, Associated Press

WASHINGTON — One war is done, another is winding down and the calls to cut the deficit are deafening. The military, a beneficiary of robust budgets for more than a decade, is coming to grips with a new reality — fewer dollars.

The election accelerated an already shifting political dynamic that next year will pair a second-term Democratic president searching for spending cuts with tea partyers and conservatives intent on preserving lower tax rates above all else, even if it means once unheard of reductions in defense.

President Obama and Congress have just a few weeks to figure out how to avert the automatic cuts to defense and domestic programs totaling $110 billion next year. Those reductions are part of the so-called fiscal cliff of expiring Bush-era tax cuts and the across-the-board cuts that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has warned would be devastating to the military.

All sides are trying to come up with a deficit-cutting plan of $1.2 trillion over 10 years. Any solution that might emerge from the high-stakes negotiations before the Jan. 2 deadline likely would include some reductions in the military budget, which has nearly doubled in the last decade to half a trillion dollars. That amount doesn’t include the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Read more: http://militarytimes.com/news/2012/11/ap-deficit-cutters-look-to-pentagon-budget-111212/

14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

SoapBox

(18,791 posts)
3. p.s....
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 01:58 PM
Nov 2012

and, I'm now thinking...let the cliff happen.

Start working backwards, with somewhat of a cleaner slate.

Panetta is really bugg'n me.

Fresh_Start

(11,330 posts)
2. so we could cut 1/3 of the defense budget and still spend more than the next 17 highest countries
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 01:50 PM
Nov 2012

spend in total? Sounds like the place to start!

Kolesar

(31,182 posts)
4. Spy satellites are a big waste. Nuclear weapons in the "Energy Department" budget
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 02:06 PM
Nov 2012

Both of those need to be cut.

LP2K12

(885 posts)
5. I'm partial to "spy" satellites...
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 02:12 PM
Nov 2012

It's what kept me employed for years both in the defense and private sector. Working in military intel my job was to use those to be the eye in the sky. They have their uses besides military factors.

Kolesar

(31,182 posts)
7. Didn't protect us on 9/11
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 02:52 PM
Nov 2012

We would get more benefit hiring translators to read foreign newspapers written in Arabic for about 1% of that budget. Welcome to DU.

LP2K12

(885 posts)
9. Protected us...
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 03:04 PM
Nov 2012

on countless other occassions.

The translators were paid the same amount I was. However, they had a higher drop out rate.

Kolesar

(31,182 posts)
10. You weren't paid what the aerospace companies were paid!
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 03:18 PM
Nov 2012

The "intelligence agencies" have a ghastly-huge budget. The reason that the spy satellites get built is so that the MIC kicks money back to congress members. It is not because they are that vital.

LP2K12

(885 posts)
11. Production...
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 03:32 PM
Nov 2012

of "spy" satellites has slowed majorly. Even during the Bush admin. We piggy back off of satellites and tech launches by public companies that image such as Google. The difference being we have to pay those companies each time we want an image. Building our satellites is a one fee.

Most of those satellites are also multi-use. Weather, space exploration, GPS, communication. We've learned it's better to consolidate than launch one-purpose monsters.

 

adieu

(1,009 posts)
12. Then move it into the open competition of consumer needs
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 03:48 PM
Nov 2012

I don't like to know that you're employed because of fear, uncertainty and doubt. Take your knowledge and skills and make something that is brought to the open market and see if it can compete with other products and services.

LP2K12

(885 posts)
13. I agree with this statement....
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 04:24 PM
Nov 2012

However, you'll find that most individual creators of this technology or absorbed by or hired by bigger names in the deferense industry. However, during the later part of my career we began using satellites owned by Google and other public companies as well as our own.

Third Doctor

(1,574 posts)
6. I'm for cuts to the Pentagon budget.
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 02:25 PM
Nov 2012

But I think we have to be careful. This could effect a lot of people's jobs.

satxdem

(131 posts)
8. It does
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 02:52 PM
Nov 2012

Because republicans never want to cut the garbage, they cut government workers. Not the expensive useless weapons, etc. They cut jobs that have been pretty helpful to veterans like my dad. It's nice to retire after 23 years of service to find employment working for the government.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
14. Could this be the "message" of the outing and lack of political protection for the Generals?
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 04:28 PM
Nov 2012

I think the new "binders" may be of the political-sexual dossier nature.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Deficit cutters look to D...