Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama/Dems COULD be in better negotiating position in 2 months (51 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Nobody wants defense cuts? I do! (7+ / 0-)

    As mentioned elsewhere, that $700 billion a year we spend on "defense" is 41% of the entire world's military budget, about 5 times the amount of the next country, which is China.

    The cuts you're talking about are over 10 years. I believe the figure you give, $500 billion is for both domestic and defense combined, with defense being half the amount. If that's correct then we're talking about cutting the defense budget by $25 billion a year.

    Looking back at that comparison to China, we could still spend three times as much as the Chinese and save $280 billion a year so the cuts you're concerned about are pretty insubstantial, relatively speaking.

    •  What I worry about is that they will make the cuts (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      on the backs of those serving, by taking it out of their pay, or their medical benefits, or other benefits they have worked for.
                          Just my two cents,

      Torture is ALWAYS wrong, no matter who is inflicting it on whom.

      by Chacounne on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 12:26:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  IIRC The defense cuts don't come from Military (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        big mouth


        Right man, right job and right time

        by Ianb007 on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 12:32:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Current sequester cuts have military benefits (0+ / 0-)

          walled off.  But that doesn't mean they couldn't be discussed as cuts to reach the cuts threshold and not trigger the sequester cuts.  However given the emphasis the President has put on the troops since he's been in office, and how Michelle has made it one of her FLOTUS priorities I can't see the President signing off on anything that would negatively impact soldiers and their families.  Cuts would be made from weapons programs, troop levels, and the MIC.  

          President Obama would have been a Republican in the 1980's.

          by Jacoby Jonze on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 06:29:57 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  that would be typical (0+ / 0-)

        it would, of course, be the absolute worst way to cut the budget but yes, I see your point.

    •  cut 30% on defense and don't look back (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      $210 billion per year, $2.1 trillion over 10. republicans either believe deficits are an issue or they are not.......cheney, fo example, famously said deficits do not matter after all.

      call their bluff. this is their not so back door approach to gut  earned benefits and they can't get away with it.

      eliminate oil subsidies
      eliminate farm subsidies
      close corporate tax loopholes
      implement corporate capital gain tax increases on money held not reinvested in business.
      shut down off-shore tax havens

      end all corporate welfare and cut defense and then come back and talk about what's left.

      mccain and graham will scream about defense cuts they can save some of the defense by offsets in corporate welfare reductions,,,,,they cannot have both.

      it is beyond outrageous to even consider cutting earned benefits when corporations and the 2% would not be hurt proportionately.

      Bill Gates said defense cuts needed to be made. I trust him.

      mittens=edsel. no matter how much money is spent to promote it, if the product sucks, no one will buy it.

      by wewantthetruth on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 07:15:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (121)
  • Community (57)
  • Memorial Day (29)
  • Culture (21)
  • Environment (20)
  • Rescued (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Civil Rights (19)
  • Science (18)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Labor (16)
  • Media (15)
  • Elections (15)
  • Education (15)
  • Ireland (14)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (14)
  • Economy (14)
  • Republicans (13)
  • Josh Duggar (13)
  • Racism (11)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site