Stupid ?: why are military cuts a bad idea?

gogadgetgo

For mobile users: why are military cuts a bad idea?

There are a million cuts to education and other services. Why not make strategic cuts to the biggest part of the federal budget? I'm not saying get rid of the navy, etc. But one part of the govt can't exist in an untouchable bubble, can it?

This will probably be a post and run since I'm off to class but I appreciate any insight. And I did post in my title, stupid ?, before any pearls are clutched.

MomlovesEloise

It is going to lead to a major loss in jobs. Most of the cuts are going to be to Military contracts. There are a lot of major US companies that exist solely as contractors and they are already cutting thousands of jobs in anticipation. 

I know less about this, but I read a story that service members are also at risk. People with the intention to go career are getting discharged from the Navy and other branches.  

RockyTopVols

MomlovesEloise:

I know less about this, but I read a story that service members are also at risk. People with the intention to go career are getting discharged from the Navy and other branches.  

This is also true. Many of the cuts would be forcing an estimated reduction of the Army from 570,000 soldiers to 490,000. The marines would also be cut from 202,000 to 182,000. Which means the private sector would have to come up with more jobs to meet the demand. This would take place over the next 5 years so our economy could also be in a very different place.

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/us/pentagon-proposes-limiting-raises-and-closing-bases-to-cut-budget.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 

 

(Not a clicky because I refuse to use IE and in Google Chrome, the dumb link button doesn't work) 

RockyTopVols

EllaHella:

Strategic cuts are one thing.  Off the top percentage cuts (via the fiscal cliff) is not good. 

Defense spending isn't just about tanks and battleships and war.  It encompasses so much including R&D on many things that will shape our future in terms of medical and technology.  A lot of the modern everyday conveniences we enjoy started out as military technology that was later released and adapted to civilian. 

Foreign intelligence would be affected.  That's what stands between us and the numerous thwarted attempts for another attack. 

Like any budget program, we need to strategically cut spending.  Not unilaterally cut with no discression. 

 

So smart and I am in love.

 

gogadgetgo

EllaHella:

Strategic cuts are one thing.nbsp; Off the top percentage cuts via the fiscal cliff is not good.nbsp;
Defense spending isn't just about tanks and battleships and war.nbsp; It encompasses sonbsp;much including Ramp;D on many things that will shape our future in terms of medical and technology.nbsp; A lot of the modern everyday conveniences we enjoy startednbsp;out as military technology that was later released and adapted to civilian.nbsp;
Foreign intelligence would be affected.nbsp; That's what stands between us and the numerous thwarted attempts for another attack.nbsp;
Like any budget program, we need to strategically cut spending.nbsp; Not unilaterally cut with no discression.nbsp;

Thank you. Makes perfect sense.

I get that straight cuts won't work but it seems like anytime you mention the military and budget cuts, people get all up in arms, rather than being open to strategic cuts.

MomlovesEloise

EllaHella:

Also, it would really affect my bank account.  And that is really really bad. 

Yeah, mine too.  Congress better get their shiit together.

penguingrrl

I would love to see things strategically cut in all sectors of government and that includes the military. I don't think that cutting of personnel is the way to accomplish this, but there's a lot of wasteful spending. A friend of mine is military and was told to order an ipad (as were several others in his group) because "if we don't spend our full budget we'll get less money next year" even though there's absolutely no need for an ipad in his position (they can make an argument for it being helpful; that does not constitute a need). I've also heard stories of what ends up amounting to a 500% markup on items purchased because they go through so many middlemen before being purchased by the military and it getting approved despite being grossly overpriced. They really need to reign in the mentality that allows this amount of waste.

I'll also say that they need to consider selling off some of their land to cut budget on security and maintenance (not to mention the money they would get from the sale). There are two abandoned forts in my area that the military refuses to sell but they also aren't using and have no plans to. Many have approached them to either build houses on that land (which would be very helpful for those displaced by Sandy) or to use it as a satellite campus of our state University (which would bring many jobs to the area) and instead it's wasting away with buildings falling down and the military trying to keep it secure.

Unfortunately people hear "cut military spending" and automatically assume it will mean we're less safe (we spend more than 10x more per capita on our military than any other country in the world) or massive layoffs instead of streamlining how they spend.

juniper19

Congress has a habit of approving military spending on projects that even the military doesn't want because it will reward military industries in their home districts.  Eliminating that kind of spending is a good idea.

We can't keep spending in areas just because there would be job losses. I'm a Democrat, so I'm not averse to government spending, but the government's job isn't to create unneeded jobs.

AGmomof3

EllaHella:

Strategic cuts are one thing.  Off the top percentage cuts (via the fiscal cliff) is not good. 

Defense spending isn't just about tanks and battleships and war.  It encompasses so much including R&D on many things that will shape our future in terms of medical and technology.  A lot of the modern everyday conveniences we enjoy started out as military technology that was later released and adapted to civilian. 

Foreign intelligence would be affected.  That's what stands between us and the numerous thwarted attempts for another attack. 

Like any budget program, we need to strategically cut spending.  Not unilaterally cut with no discression. 

Yes this!  Well said - thank you! 

AGmomof3

EllaHella:

Strategic cuts are one thing.  Off the top percentage cuts (via the fiscal cliff) is not good. 

Defense spending isn't just about tanks and battleships and war.  It encompasses so much including R&D on many things that will shape our future in terms of medical and technology.  A lot of the modern everyday conveniences we enjoy started out as military technology that was later released and adapted to civilian. 

Foreign intelligence would be affected.  That's what stands between us and the numerous thwarted attempts for another attack. 

Like any budget program, we need to strategically cut spending.  Not unilaterally cut with no discression. 

Yes this!  Well said - thank you! 

LuckyDad

Number one, we need to listen to the Pentagon and take the pork out of military spending. There are too many bases that are kept open and useless contracts that remain funded solely for pork reasons. I'm in a Navy town, so I've witnessed this sort of thought process with my own eyes, where the most fiscal conservative people don't want to see a dime cut from military spending that will hurt jobs locally.

Long term, the US needs to shrink our military, it is an obscene portion of our GDP and hurting our productivity. But it needs to be a gradual shift over many years and decades. Unfortunately, those who believe in Pax Americana and peace through strength want us to spend more, so it's very hard to get a coherent policy in place that will gradually draw things down.