Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    04-03-17 @ 12:34 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    241

    Re: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    Dissolve the Marines.
    Who would defend the europeans and their pacifistic ideologies? Would france and spain actually start spending money on their military, instead of 50-year-old retirees?

  2. #12
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,092

    Re: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

    Quote Originally Posted by joergan View Post
    Who would defend the europeans and their pacifistic ideologies? Would france and spain actually start spending money on their military, instead of 50-year-old retirees?
    The Army maybe?

    There is no reason in today's word to have the Marines. At the moment you have the airforce, navy, army and marines, all with their own administrative systems for the most part. You could save tons of money by dumping the marines and letting the army do their job instead. The Brits did it long ago for example. It saved a ton of money.

    Like it or not, the US military could use a good old fashion cost benefit analysis with no strings attached. The problem is often there are historical reasons or "feelings" when it comes to various military units.. no we cant dissolve that unit.. it goes back to the civil war or revolutionary war bla bla .. Well do you really want to keep military units in service because of that or cut the waste?
    PeteEU

  3. #13
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon
    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,340
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    Like it or not, the US military could use a good old fashion cost benefit analysis with no strings attached. The problem is often there are historical reasons or "feelings" when it comes to various military units.. no we cant dissolve that unit.. it goes back to the civil war or revolutionary war bla bla .. Well do you really want to keep military units in service because of that or cut the waste?
    Hmm... that's a good point Pete but I feel it's more then that...

    The military of the United States is used as a political tool by both parties in the way that, if funding were cut to the military, or units disbanded or cut back, that party would be charged with weakening the defences of the United States and it would be a good bullet for the opposing party come election time...

  4. #14
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,092

    Re: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    Hmm... that's a good point Pete but I feel it's more then that...

    The military of the United States is used as a political tool by both parties in the way that, if funding were cut to the military, or units disbanded or cut back, that party would be charged with weakening the defences of the United States and it would be a good bullet for the opposing party come election time...
    Oh I know, that is why I am saying a good old fashion cost benefit analysis that is fully independent.

    There are many military bases in the US and abroad that are not really needed but are kept alive for political reasons. The same goes for weapons systems and even units... I mean lets say they find out the 101st Airborne needs to be cut.. ya think that would happen any time soon with its history behind it? And that is often the problem. Look at the last time they wanted to close bases.. what a political mudball that was.

    But that does not change the fact that the US military is bloated as hell with 1.5 million men and women and only 200ishk of those involved in combat... You aint telling me that it takes 1.2 million troops to defend the US against Canada and Mexico?
    PeteEU

  5. #15
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Weapons do not serve a useful economic function. A billion spent on infrastructure is better for the economy than a billion spent on bombs.
    Oh, I see. Billions on antiquated technology requiring massive subsidies to move small numbers of people across a handful of unconnected networks -- is an example of something that serves a useful economic function.

    Check.

    (if you really believe that I've got a Bridge to Nowhere *cough* another infrastructure-related economic opportunity to sell you)

  6. #16
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,092

    Re: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Oh, I see. Billions on antiquated technology requiring massive subsidies to move small numbers of people across a handful of unconnected networks -- is an example of something that serves a useful economic function.

    Check.

    (if you really believe that I've got a Bridge to Nowhere *cough* another infrastructure-related economic opportunity to sell you)
    Guessing you never been to France or Spain and been on their high speed rail system.. or Germany, Japan, China.. and a few other places that have high speed rail.
    PeteEU

  7. #17
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Oh, I see. Billions on antiquated technology requiring massive subsidies to move small numbers of people across a handful of unconnected networks -- is an example of something that serves a useful economic function.
    High-speed rail is not an antiquated technology, and the ability to move people faster than a car and cheaper than an airplane is pretty useful.

    Certainly far more economically useful than a bomb.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  8. #18
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    Guessing you never been to France or Spain and been on their high speed rail system.. or Germany, Japan, China.. and a few other places that have high speed rail.
    These are countries that have much higher population densities, much faster trains than those we're spending money on, much higher fuel costs, much lower rate of car ownership, etc. In the US, it's a simple truth that it's faster and more convienent for people to drive short distances and fly long distances. Public rail, for the most part, requires massive subsidies to stay afloat. The ridership just isn't there.

    But not to deflect the debate. Was just rolling my eyes at the politicians who manage to continually propel us into debt all while proclaiming how they're doing such great things for the economy. It's great that they want to trim the defense budget, but it's kind of meaningless when they're simultaneously spending massive amounts on crap like high speed trains.

  9. #19
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Certainly far more economically useful than a bomb.
    It's not about choosing one or the other, it's about trimming waste. Choosing neither when neither makes sense. Money on high speed rail is money wasted. Period.
    Last edited by Taylor; 06-30-10 at 06:08 PM.

  10. #20
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Pentagon looks for $100B in cost savings

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    When it's billions on weapons systems and contractor services we need to "cut costs"

    When it's billions on high speed rail projects we're "stimulating the economy" and "creating jobs"

    Gotcha.
    Well it all depends. In normal economic times you may not need to put in any of those projects. However, in times like now which deregulation and improper banking practices have driven the economy to break, it's better to spend the money on temporary job creation till the economy is strong enough to take back over. If you're going to ask what's best to spend the money on; occupational wars which do nothing for our "safety" and sovereignty or public work projects such as true high speed rail or a high speed internet backbone, I'd rather we spend the money on ourselves. In fact, for our current economic woes, having spent the money on public works projects instead of billions in bailouts to the people who caused the problems would have been well more helpful. But the goal wasn't to alleviate the stress on the working class, but rather to make sure the politician's rich buddies staid rich, even at the expense of everyone else.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •