backtop


Print 36 comment(s) - last by marvdmartian.. on Apr 24 at 8:32 AM

Major budget cuts could have ramifications for all US military branches in the years to come.

Due to increased scrutiny and frustration, the U.S. federal government is shifting monetary budgets with procurement and research and development projects likely receiving a $66 billion cut if spending caps aren’t adjusted. 
 
The current five-year spending plan is more than $115 billion above mandated defense-spending caps, which could have major ramifications.  The budget cuts would hit everything from the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II to the Airbus Light Utility Helicopter and Boeing KC-46 tanker.  In addition, the U.S. Army wouldn’t be able to acquire new Black Hawk helicopters and Stryker double-hull vehicles might also face cancellation.


Boeing KC46A Tanker [Image Source: Wikipedia]
 
Moving forward, the DoD will focus on research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E), with an estimated $63 billion spent in 2014 alone.  One of the business sectors of the RDT&E program, the Future Years Defense Plan, will see its budget continually drop – from $20 billion in 2009 down to $10 billion by 2018.
 
“There’s a difference between spending money and spending money smartly,” said James Hasik, Atlantic Council senior fellow.  “There are folks out in the world who make the argument that you have to spread money around the world wildly, because money spent on research is just good because it just leads to development.  This is not a compelling argument because there are dead ends against which you can continue to apply money and not get very far.”
 
DoD officials want to make sure basic research funding and early-stage development both receive funding through the red tape, though this will force other future military technology research onto the shelf.  
 
Congress is evaluating another wave of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) papers in 2017, giving the DoD the ability to close bases on an individual basis.

Source: Defense News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

US was folowing the USSR
By michael67 on 4/22/2014 12:21:56 PM , Rating: 0
Maybe finally people starting to wake up, and seeing that US is following the USSR, in that it will also collapse under its own military budget.

The US beat the USSR by outspending a corrupt communistic system.

The US was beating it self by the greed of a corrupt capitalistic system.

Now just hope that there will be more smart people voting next time and give more corrupt politicians the boot. ;-)




RE: US was folowing the USSR
By mik123 on 4/22/2014 1:44:19 PM , Rating: 2
If you give the boot to corrupt politicians, who will govern the country?


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By michael67 on 4/22/2014 2:16:46 PM , Rating: 3
That's the thing, you all assume that almost all politicians are corrupt, then why would you bother to look for the good one's?

But then you automatically also only get people that are corruptible.

Me i assume most of my local politicians are not corrupt, just because thats the standard we set for our self.

Its a bit the same as a slut, why dose that type of woman only get crap boyfriends, its because its the standard they set for them self.

And it shows the social bankruptcy of the US, and also why i think you have so many orthodox Christians in the US, as they try to compensate for the corruption they see around them.

Not trying to flame, its just how i see it, and hope i am more wrong then right.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Labotomizer on 4/22/2014 5:04:29 PM , Rating: 2
I had a good friend who became a local politician, city council member. A business owner that was less than reputable took him and his family to Italy. He also ended up with a Harley.

I would have never thought he'd be corrupted. Truth is, he was. It's a reason I've never ran for office. I'd like to think I'd be above that but if someone said they'd take my family to Italy for two weeks I'd be hard pressed to say no.

Politicians don't fear voters because they know they only have to meet low expectations to stay in office. Vote ALL of them out a few times and they'll realize that's not the case and maybe we'll get politicians who are there for the good of the people they serve rather than their political party or themselves.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By michael67 on 4/22/2014 7:51:48 PM , Rating: 1
Do that here, and you likely end up with your face on the front page.

Not saying there is no corruption here, you just dont get away with it so openly, as they would like to burn you or it.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Argon18 on 4/22/2014 2:12:40 PM , Rating: 1
"Maybe finally people starting to wake up, and seeing that US is following the USSR, in that it will also collapse under its own military budget."

Only if you ignore the fact that entitlement spending is *by far* the largest part of the government's annual budget. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare, Food Stamps, Unemployment, etc. And that DoD budget has been shrinking for the past several years.

For those at home who are keeping count, 2013 Defense spending was just 18% of total federal budget. Entitlement spending was more than 60%.

US is getting crushed under its own weight, but it has nothing to do with defense spending, and everything to do with steering the US towards socialism.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By michael67 on 4/22/2014 2:30:27 PM , Rating: 3
You do know that the US is spending more then the next 20 country's together.

And that most country's only spend about 2%?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By godlyatheist on 4/22/2014 2:47:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
by michael67 on April 22, 2014 at 2:30 PM

You do know that the US is spending more then the next 20 country's together.

And that most country's only spend about 2%?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget

That's a completely irrelevant fact to the point raised by Argon18. So what if the US spends 3.8% of its GDP on defense? It has more bases around the world than any other country in the world, they cost $ to run. This is also ignoring the glaring fact the US also has a higher GDP than those countries listed

The point is, entitlement spending is 3 times, that's 300%, more than defense spending. If you want to make a dent in the budget, you go after the largest portion -> entitlement.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By ianweck on 4/22/2014 2:58:40 PM , Rating: 2
Here, since he seems to like Wikipedia links so much:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Sp...


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By michael67 on 4/22/2014 3:25:10 PM , Rating: 4
No the point is, is that 18% of the federal budget is spend on the militarily, opposed to a average of 2% by other country's.

Let me ask you, if i cut your income by 15%, will you run in to financial problems?

If you do a cost benefit analyze, did the $4 to 6,000,000,000,000.00 you spending on Iraq and Afghanistan deliver you any benefits?
quote:
The U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will cost taxpayers $4 trillion to $6 trillion, taking into account the medical care of wounded veterans and expensive repairs to a force depleted by more than a decade of fighting, according to a new study by a Harvard researcher.

www .washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/study-i raq-afghan-war-costs-to-top-4-trillion/2013/03/28/b 82a5dce-97ed-11e2-814b-063623d80a60_story.html

If the US had only spend half of that money smartly around the world being a sugar daddy, instead of being a bully, the US would have bin a lot saver.

Really the old saying that you make more friends with Honey then with vinegar is still true.

Many country's in Africa love the Chinese, hate the US and really dislike the EU country's.

Why, not because they are less corrupt then we are are, but they do a lot of symbol development work, like with helping building nice roads and so on.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By boeush on 4/22/2014 10:14:18 PM , Rating: 2
But passing around sugar and honey is too sissy-like.

It doesn't allow a brave manly Texan to whip out his big fat ...brain... and smack the globe around with it ;-)

We, as a nation, can't allow ourselves to be pussified. We'd rather go for broke -- literally.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By ianweck on 4/22/2014 2:51:47 PM , Rating: 2
His point is not that the U.S. doesn't spend a lot on the military, but that overall the U.S. is spending more on entitlement programs. What is the percentage the U.S. is spending on entitlements, versus the rest of the world?


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Rad T on 4/23/2014 11:26:56 PM , Rating: 2
Other countries spend a significantly higher percentage - if you include their universal health insurance (essentially Medicare/Medicaid covering everyone) and thier social insurance that covers unemployment and pensions.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By arazok on 4/22/2014 3:11:15 PM , Rating: 2
Your confusing your numbers.

Most countries only spend about 2-3% of GDP. The US spends 4.6% of GDP (which is 18% of it’s budget).

The fact that they spend more than the next 20 countries put together just goes to show how large the US economy is compared to most other countries.

I agree, the US should be spending far less on it’s military, but it should also be spending a lot less on entitlements.

Actually, I think it would be interesting to see it use it’s military as an entitlement program by eliminating welfare and unemployment benefits and guaranteeing every citizen who wants one a job in the army.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By vortmax2 on 4/23/2014 11:38:21 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Actually, I think it would be interesting to see it use it’s military as an entitlement program by eliminating welfare and unemployment benefits and guaranteeing every citizen who wants one a job in the army.


Now that's an interesting idea.


By CalaverasGrande on 4/23/2014 3:07:01 PM , Rating: 2
that is a great idea for the able bodied. But not so much for the elderly, the walmart employees (who are given foodstamp applications with orientation materials) or the spouses of active duty personnel.
In England there used to be a law against being a 'sturdy beggar'. Someone who does not work, but is able bodied. I am not sure we could have such a law in the US. But I do think we should make sure people who are perfectly fit are not on assitance for no good reason. OTOH we should not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Welfare and SNAP may be high, but how much of that can be quantified as fraud?


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Spuke on 4/22/2014 3:20:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And that most country's only spend about 2%?
They don't have to spend big on military because we do. Personally, I'm ALL for these huge cuts and more. Defend your own friggin selves. Most of these conflicts, all BS and politics aside, have crap to do with US interests (like the Ukranian deal). The funny part is the VAST majority of Americans don't want to be either involved at all or involved VERY little in foreign issues. Yet our gov just keeps soldering on doing what we don't want them to do.

And, yes, it's the welfare spending that's crushing us not the military. That's common knowledge here and not up for debate but our gov won't cut a dime from where it needs to be cut (Medicaid/Medicare).


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By michael67 on 4/22/2014 3:44:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Most of these conflicts, all BS and politics aside, have crap to do with US interests (like the Ukrainian deal).

Actually a large conflict in the Ukraine you gone feel in your pocket to, Ukraine's primary exports are iron, steel, mining products, agricultural products, and machinery.

Just take agricultural, if the Ukraine would become more stable it could become also more efficient.

quote:
Reforms could release more agriculture potential.

Ukraine’s economy used to ride on the strength of the country’s agriculture exports, mostly grain. But the country’s status as the breadbasket of Europe is crumbling. Today, agriculture makes up less than 10 percent of GDP. According to the World Bank, “Ukraine has tremendous agricultural potential” but “this potential has not been fully exploited due to depressed farm incomes and a lack of modernization within the sector.” Insecure land ownership and an inefficient registration system have also held back Ukraine’s farming sector, but it has improved in recent years.

In 2012, Ukrainian agricultural exports increased by nearly 40 percent to $17 billion, according to Mykola Prysyazhnyuk, the Ukrainian Minister of Agrarian Policy and Food. In 2013, corn exports grew by one-third from the previous year. On Wednesday, Ukraine’s prime minister, Serhiy Arbuzov, said the country plans to increase its foreign exchange reserves this year with $20 billion of agricultural products.


Whit food prices already so high, a conflict would only rice them quicker, and if you think you will not be affected, think again, your food prices are largely depended on world prices.

Welcome to global economic.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Spuke on 4/22/2014 4:52:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Actually a large conflict in the Ukraine you gone feel in your pocket to, Ukraine's primary exports are iron, steel, mining products, agricultural products, and machinery.
No. Dude I live in the US, we don't get any of that from them.

Iron - Canada
Steel - China BY FAR
Mining - Japan and Germany
Agricultural - All US


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Mint on 4/22/2014 4:40:11 PM , Rating: 1
Who is welfare spending crushing, exactly?

You think all the companies getting business from these welfare spenders are complaining? The restaurants getting food stamp money, or the groceries getting welfare and EI money, or the farmers selling food to both of those businesses? Cut out this primary demand and you get nothing but layoffs.

Just what do you hope to achieve in the economy with entitlement cuts? Who is going to replace all that demand?

All that happens is the wealthy have less gov't debt to buy, so they put their money in the bank instead for equally crap interest, and banks have more deposits than they know what to do with (hence excess reserves). The economy shrinks (can't produce what nobody is buying) and unemployment gets worse, so what's the point?


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Spuke on 4/22/2014 4:57:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You think all the companies getting business from these welfare spenders are complaining?
What does that have anything to do with the federal budget where welfare spending IS the largest chunk of spending by far and the place that must be cut in order to get out deficit under control. Let me put it to you this way. if we reduced the military to zero, we'd STILL have a deficit. Comprende?


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By ianweck on 4/22/2014 6:53:43 PM , Rating: 2
By your logic, if we increased entitlement spending to 80% from the current 60%, the economy would be in even better shape? Wise up man. The only way out of this is to create more jobs. Not more handouts.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By ianweck on 4/22/2014 6:54:34 PM , Rating: 2
Comment meant for Mint, not Spuke.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By boeush on 4/22/2014 10:34:44 PM , Rating: 2
@Mint,
quote:
Just what do you hope to achieve in the economy with entitlement cuts?
A balanced budget, for a change. A steady draw-down of the national debt, back toward a safe and sustainable fraction of the GDP.

Unless we do the above -- and soon -- we will all go broke as a nation. Our currency will be on a guaranteed trajectory to worthlessness, because we will eventually be forced to default.

The only times debt financing makes sense, is in the context of:
1) investment into major long-term projects that are reasonably assured to eventually more than pay off the initial investment
2) dealing with an unplanned-for catastrophe that must be tackled in the here and now despite the fact that saved cash isn't available or is insufficient to do so

Day-to-day spending on wage or health care subsidies does not fit that bill. As you obliquely note, it's nothing but pulled-forward demand. It's the economic analogue of the 'stimulus' a meth junkie gets from a hit; over time the 'stimulus' ceases to stimulate and becomes a mere daily necessity of survival. Then, when the next big crisis unfolds, there's no more ammunition left in the 'stimulus' magazine -- it's all been frittered away on non-emergency everyday necessities -- while the health of the financial body is so severely compromised that it's unable to tackle the additional insult. What follows, is financial death.

So, what would one hope to achieve with a balanced budget? The answer is nothing short of long-term fiscal survival. The near-term withdrawal agony is inevitable, of course. But it sure as hell beats death.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By SPOOFE on 4/23/2014 3:35:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You think all the companies getting business from these welfare spenders are complaining?

In Los Angeles at least, yes, many do.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Volvic on 4/22/2014 5:29:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Defend your own friggin selves.

True, there are freeloaders, usually the small countries.

But don't ever forget that the USA is mainly responsible for this: you guys shape your own foreign policy.
Thus you mostly have to blame yourself.


By CalaverasGrande on 4/23/2014 3:02:59 PM , Rating: 2
"For those at home who are keeping count, 2013 Defense spending was just 18% of total federal budget. Entitlement spending was more than 60%."
I'd love to know where you get your numbers?
First of all social security, medicare and medicaid shold not be lumped in with SNAP and welfare. People that work every week of their adult lives pay into those programs and I have no problem with a pensioner drawing on them. Welfare and SNAP otoh do not require that you ever worked at all to be elegible. So conflating these different types of programs only serves to bump up the numbers of so called 'entitlement' costs.
Defense spending is simply not as low as you make it seem. If you go strictly by the NDAA bills it may appear that low. But there is an enormous amount of earmarks and pork that show up in unrelated legislation. In fact it literally takes a full time staff just to keep up with the flurry of spending that goes on in the Iron Triangle. And then there are the black budget expenditures that we are not allowed to know about until many years later.
And factually the DOD budget has been cut back, but in terms of total spending, it has only been cut by a very small token amount.
Military spending was not cut significantly after the end of the cold war. And it appears that Dem and GOP hawks will make sure that it is not cut at the end of Iraq and Afghanistan either.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Rad T on 4/23/2014 11:20:00 PM , Rating: 2
Are Veteran's affairs entitlement spending too? The DoD budget is going down - we are finally winding it down after Bush's wars. Do you propose to start another war to keep it up?


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By CaedenV on 4/22/2014 4:09:50 PM , Rating: 2
Self refuting argument?
The article is about how defense spending is shrinking year over year, not expanding. In total we have been slashing our defense budget spending substantially for years simply by not keeping with inflation, and now it is a relatively small part of our overall budget compared to just about everything else. Yes, we spend a lot more real money than most other countries, but the fact is that we are a bigger country and we CAN and DO afford that part of our budget quite easily.

What has potential to bankrupt our country is much more similar to Japan's issues in that we have an age bubble moving through the system. We have a large population approaching (and putting off) a retirement that was expected and planned for a lifespan of 60-70 years and will instead be living some 80-90 years. This life extension was unexpected and impossible to plan for, and now the US is desperately trying to shift the costs associated with it from the individuals to the overall society in hopes that it will more gracefully handle this load than individual planning.

Point being that our defense spending is such a small drop in the bucket compared to almost everything else that it is trivial to complain about. The only hope that we have in the US for getting through the next 20-30 years is that cheap power and reliable automation kick in ahead of the bulk of the baby boomer retirement. If it does, then we will be able to grow our economy fast enough to pay for everything; and if it does not then we are in for a world of hurt for a while.

Thankfully, after that 20-30 years then things will even out again just in time for me to retire in peace :D

Note to those in their mid 50's to late 60's of the 'baby boomer' generation: Please understand that my generation is not nearly as annoyed at your retirement (or lack of retirement) as we all seem. Just as you feel you are facing an impossible situation with retirement, my generation also feels that same strain in other ways; but we lack the experience and wisdom to deal with this pressure 'gracefully'. You guys are our parents and grandparents, and while we often do not act like it, we do appreciate all that you have done for us.


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Spuke on 4/22/2014 5:01:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Thankfully, after that 20-30 years then things will even out again just in time for me to retire in peace :D
Ohhh noooo! You gotta stay working! You can retire when you die!


RE: US was folowing the USSR
By Mint on 4/22/14, Rating: 0
RE: US was folowing the USSR
By boeush on 4/22/2014 11:08:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Cutting back the demand for goods/services from the elderly achieves nothing; in fact, it's worse, as it just shrinks the economy needlessly.
Every additional dollar debt-spent into the economy, increases the quantity of dollars in circulation, thereby devaluing all existing savings. Savings, you ought to note, is also capital -- and the only means available for the 'little people' to reliably build tangible wealth. Through sustained inflation and routine deficit spending, the government is not achieving economic stimulus. On the contrary, it is engineering economic decay.

What it is achieving, is destruction of capital, inhibition of capital formation (savings), and instigation of capital misallocation -- where risk of malinvestment is viewed as preferable to the certainty of getting robbed by inflation. Thus we replace productive enterprises with speculation; we replace value creation with net-negative financialization schemes that rob Peter to pay Paul while siphoning off a stream of interest into the pockets of financial elites, and at the same time driving up asset prices to unsustainable and unaffordable levels. And it also hits people on fixed income (e.g. living off institutional bond yields) particularly hard. Yes, those very same elderly (as well as all the retirement and pension funds that were built on the premise of perpetual 8% yearly ROI... LOL) -- i.e. the very people you're so concerned about 'helping'.

It's a system that's deliberately feeding increasingly obscene economic manias and busts. It's nothing but a system of institutionalized highway robbery. And on top of that, it's utterly unsustainable because it is predicated upon a never-ending exponential growth in consumption (which in itself is sheer mathematical and physical idiocy) -- but no concomitant growth in production or population or energy or resource availability.
quote:
Where else are people going to put their money?
So who are these 'people' that have money? Are they corporations? Because real living human beings in this country tend not to have savings: they only have ever-escalating debt. Which is considered a 'good thing' because otherwise what else could backfill a hole in the 70% of our economy ("services"), after we've willfully surrendered most actual production (i.e. real wealth creation) to foreign sweatshops and slave plantations via "free trade" agreements?

Maybe you view as desirable a national trajectory toward a feudal system where 300,000,000 serfs slave away all their lives for the benefit of 3,000 mega-wealthy barons; I on the other hand, find this trajectory deeply unjust, unacceptable, and ultimately doomed to a bloody and violent resolution (as history illustrates aplenty, the world over.)


"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki