I have no problem supporting responsible military spending. I want to support my vets and current service men and women. But let's look at the data. 44.4% of all taxes go directly to military spending while only 2.2% is invested into the education of the leaders of tomorrow. Even as a die hard red blooded American Marine do you not have issue with spending nearly half of all the collected taxes to fund our military?
Even if you added up all of the collective military spending for every country in Europe, we still spent 28% more than them. Russia, our communist enemies? We spend 10 times what they do on military. Communist China? We spend 6 times more than they do.
If you added up what every country in the world spent on military (except for the United States), they collectively only spent $51 billion dollars more than the United States did.
I'm just asking this: To maintain our dominant status as top dog, do we have to outspend every one by such a large margin? Can we not invest more into education and science?
What I'm really calling for is that our elected officials be more fiscally responsible with the excessively high tax rates we pay. Military spending, in the light of the leadership errors in Iraq, the Cheney inspired Halliburton monopoly and the expensive mercenary branch of the U.S. military (Blackwater or Xe or whatever they change to next), and the 44.4% allotment...it seems the most high profile target. But I'm not just picking on military expenditures.
NASA, for instance. In this time of economic downturn, I find it highly illogical to be spending nearly $80 million in tax payer funding to send a missile into the moon hoping to find evidence of lunar water in the debris. Not only that but let's take some Ron Paul advice on shrinking the unnecessary weight out of our federal government...
If you cannot see either image clearly, just click on each image to visit the site origin to see it in larger print.
U.S. Military Spending vs The Rest of the World
Allocation of our U.S. Tax Dollars - Pie Chart
The Raw Data
9 comments:
As a die hard red blooded American Marine.......I have no problems spending half our collected taxes to fund the military. And here is why....
WE ARE AT WAR. Enough said.....
Think about this. For every humvee that gets blown up by a roadside bomb.....does it need to be replaced? Every weapon that malfunctions under the stress of war.....does it need to be replaced? Every uniform that gets cut and ripped because your dodging bullets....does it need to be replaced? Does our military need to eat? Do the jets and choppers and various vehicles need fuel? How about the free healthcare given to military members?
These are just a few reasons as to why 44.4% of taxes are going to military spending. Is it alot? Yes, but this is also a time of war. I'd like to see the spending during times of no conflicts.....I'm sure they'd be different.
As for the rest of the world. If you ran a "U.S. friendly" country, would you worry too much about military? You already know you wouldn't. The rest of the world see's "us" coming to their rescue if anything should go down. Why spend money when they don't have to?!!
Fiscally responsible, yeah I agree with that. But unfortunately, it doesn't matter who you put in the oval office. I don't see it happening. As far as Cheney and Halliburton are concerned......monopoly is one of the greatest games out the right?
Bro, you're being a drama queen. Of course, no one is complaining about all of those day to day expenses of required needs. This isn't about that.
I'm not anti-American, anti-war, or even completely anti-Bush. But I'm not going to close my eyes to the facts and statistics.
Yeah, we are at war. Does that mean we close our eyes while our tax money disappears down the toilet in the name of patriotism and supporting the troops?
And regardless of all the great work and praiseworthy humanitarian measures taken by our brave soldiers, think of the lives lost (over 4,000 US casualties and over 31,000 injured) and money spent in Iraq...
What if that time and money would have been focused instead back in Afghanistan and focusing on finding actual Taliban members and conspirators?
I know I'm not going to win this argument with you...but I'll debate it anyways.
I guess I can't see how money is wasted when we replace bombs that have been used, replace bullets that have been shot, consistently upgrade body armour, and consistently field and test weaponry that would greatly reduce the risk of civilian caualties. If that's throwing money down the toilet.....then please continue.
Is some money mis-spent? Yes. But the same could be said about education as well. Is there money that is mis-spent there? Yes. And did you honestly say "science"? How many millions and millions of government money and civilian donations go into AIDS research every year? And we still don't have a cure?!! But you don't see me crying about it. The reason I'm not, is because I "assume" (I can't be certain) that at least 90% of the money is being spent wisely. With how corrupt our government is (both Democrat and Republicans alike) I'll take 90% and live with it.
I won't debate the issue of wether or not we should be in Iraq. I honestly haven't made up my mind on the issue. But, I will say this, based on all the "intelligence" given to Bush before the invasion I don't think any of us would have taken a different approach. I think he's being scapegoated for a decision he made based off of reports from countless US and foreign intelligence agencies.
As far as Afghanistan is concerned. I agree. More time and effort is needed there. I personally feel it's a much tougher fight than Iraq. At least Iraq had an economy. Afghanistan has nothing.
Bottom line.....if the money we spend keeps us (Americans) and our allies safer, spend away. At least with Bush the world knew not to mess with us. Now Obama goes out and apologizes to Muslims (why?), backs down to Russian pressure in regards to air defense missles (why?), wants to sit down and chat with a man that has claimed to the world that he wants Israel wiped off the face of the earth (why?) and accepts a Nobel Peace Prize basically for saying everything every other president has said before him and being black.
Hmmm......if he raised my pay, lowered my taxes and kept me and my family safe maybe I'd start liking him, but unfortunately I see the exact opposite happening.
I was just wondering if you (TJ) and Matt are preparing for a life in politics?
You're using examples of day to day operational expenses again...no one has a problem with those.
We're talking about the tens of billions in lost cash, misplacement of hundreds of thousands of weapons, spare parts, vehicles, etc.
We're talking about overpaying for Blackwater's services. We're talking about overpaying by handing out no-bid contracts to KBR (former Halliburton division) and Halliburton.
Not to mention the national security risk of essentially allowing a mercenary army (Blackwater, Xe) to have training facilities and compounds on domestic soil. What happens when we decide they are no longer worth paying for but a conglomerate of communist countries do? Do we assume that Blackwater, Xe will do choose the morally patriotic thing to do or take the money?
Regarding AIDS, about $20 billion will be spent on AIDS in 2009 with the US responsible for about half. And thanks to research, treatments are beginning to show promise. But what about cancer research? The National Cancer Institute operated off of roughly $6 million last year. How about stem cell research? Alzheimer's? Parkinsons?
I sincerely hope we are at 90% efficiency with our military spending...but I doubt it. If I believed that, I wouldn't have brought this subject up.
I'll disagree about Iraq. Lots of people disagreed. That's why many in Congress felt so betrayed by Bush. Congress votes to go to war and gives the President special executive directives and he got side tracked. You know, North Korea, Iraq, Syria...they were all listed on the intelligence reports too...but we didn't go there? Why Iraq only?
Questions we'll hopefully know the answers to 50 years from now when the paperwork is declassified.
Addressing your "I hate Obama" speech-
Read his "apology" and tell me if you are still outraged...
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjNkOTI5MDIyMTRiZWNkMjFlN2JkOWU1OGU4NDVjYWU=
Obama, Russia, and the Poland Missile Defense System - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6720153.stm
Sitting down with anti-Israel militants? We're you pissed when Reagan wanted to discuss peace options with Gorbachev? Is trying to discuss peace agreements such a sign of weakness?
Nobel prize, schmobel prize...no one cares about the Nobel prize...and if Obama had not have won it, people wouldn't even be talking about who won or didn't win the Nobel prize. No he didn't deserve it but who cares?
And yes, Matt and I will be running this country very soon. John and Bobby Kennedy style...minus the whole assassination thing...but Marilyn Monroe is all mine...wait, I mean, that won't be happening either...officially...lol...
I hear ya on Blacwater and all those other "agencies". I don't agree with them either. I will disagree with the fact that they could potentially threaten our national security by going else where. They are Americans first. They pose no greater threat and probably less of a threat to national security than those wack job militias out in Montana and Idaho.
Lost money? No one can deny that......but what about losing money in this huge bailout? AIG has paid bigger bonus' this year than they did last year! The CEO of GM (the one fired by Obama) gets a $20 mil retirement! Fire me! I'll take $20 mil for a job not well done! That's money lost too, right?
As far as science and research goes. How many years consecutively have we put millions of dollars into this research? How many doctors became rich with no cures? Your talking about money lost during the war......but we've been at "war" with AIDS since the 80's. Don't get me wrong, I agree we need more research and I do agree with stem cell research. I hated when Bush said no to it.
I have my own theories as to why Iraq was chosen over those other countries. You might not believe this, but I'm not as big of a fan of Bush as you might think. I do think he felt obligated to get Saddam for his dad. But strategically, as a geographic location Iraq wasn't as bad of a choice as you might think. Smack dab in the middle of the Middle East with great striking access to any other country that might want to act stupid. Or attack Isreal?
I do personally disagree with having two wars at the same time, by choice. We have been spread too thin for too long. But like you said, in 50 years we can read the reports and hopefully understand the decision making. Maybe there was more underlying circumstances that threatened our national security than we know about. But then again, maybe not.
I never said I hate Obama. It's hard to hate someone that's well spoken and so charasmatic. I just don't trust him. And wether you want to admit it, that was an apology to the Muslim world. He is a master of vocabulary!
As far as Russia is concerned......from your own website:
Has President Obama given in to the Russians?
He says not and that he is simply reacting to a change in threat perception. However, the Russians are delighted as they see this as a diplomatic and military victory.
Are we to just believe him when he says he didn't give in? C'mon! You know he did! And because of that he's saying this:
Does this mean the whole anti-missile system will be dismantled?
No. Other parts of the system are still planned. But perhaps more emphasis in future will be put on the ship-based interceptors that are more mobile.
Short range missles will be put in. Why? So Russia doesn't get their feelings hurt and feel threatened because these short range missles can't reach any of their military bases. And why should American ships have to be out at sea for months on end because the Russians are feeling nervous?!
Gorbachev and Reagan are totally different than that crazy wacko in Iran and Obama. You can't even compare them. Gorbachev and Reagan were BOTH willing to sit down and talk diplomatically. Gorbachev wasn't calling for the destruction of a country and entire race of people before sitting down either. No comparison there!
Talking peace is not a sign of weakness. It's a sign of maturity and responsibility. However, if only one side is showing that maturity and responsibility is it even worth sitting down?
Nobel prize.......I care! Everyone (including himself) knows he didn't deserve it. Then why accept? I don't accept things unless I deserve them. Quit feeding the ego Obama......because your about to explode! LOL
Kennedy's?? I prefer Reagan...
No Marilyn Monroe?!! Nveremind.....I'm out!
Who needs Marilyn Monroe, when you have Nicole and I???? I don't think the white house could handle any Shelby in office! Normally family ties are on the same page on most issues, so it would be very interesting to see you all fighting issues in front of the whole nation!!!!
Post a Comment