Page 1 of 5 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 9 of 44

Thread: This is for you, UGLY

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Default This is for you, UGLY

    UGLY,

    I just wanted to point out this article so you could see how well your plan for eliminating cost overruns with defense spending might work....See the bold type at the bottom.

    WORLD VIEW

    Fareed Zakaria


    Is Robert Gates A Genius?


    When a true genius appears," the English satirist Jonathan Swift wrote, "you may know him by this sign; that all the dunces are in confederacy against him." Genius might be a bit much as a description of the secretary of defense, but Robert Gates's budget proposal has certainly gathered all the right opponents. There are the defense contractors, worried that decades of fraudulent accounting are coming to a halt; the Beltway consultants for whom the war on terror has been a bonanza; the armed services, which have gotten used to having every fantasy funded; and the congressmen who protect all this institutionalized corruption just to make sure they keep jobs in their state.
    If you're wondering where to come down on the Gates plan, here's a simple guide: John McCain, the most thoughtful, reform-minded legislator on military issues, "strongly supports" it. Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe—who has compared the EPA to the Gestapo, Carol Browner to Tokyo Rose and environmentalists to the Third Reich—warns that it will lead to the "disarming of America." You choose.
    In recent decades, defense budgeting has existed in a dreamland, where ever-more-elaborate weapons are built without regard to enemies, costs or trade-offs. In 2008 the General Accounting Office said cost overruns for the Pentagon's 95 biggest weapons programs—just the overruns!—added up to $300 billion. The system has become so pervasive and entrenched that most people no longer bother to get outraged.

    Here's the link to the entire article:

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/193487
    Your ignorance is painful to witness.....

  2. #2
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: This is for you, UGLY

    Imagine if the defense contractors had to eat that 300 billion plus 10% off the top of their gross profit. It would make them highly accountable. I dont like that they make defense spending bad. We only spend around 4-5% of GDP on defense. I cant argue with the need to reign in the wasted spending though.

  3. #3
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: This is for you, UGLY

    We supposedly spend 50% of the total world spending on defense.

  4. #4
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: This is for you, UGLY

    Quote Originally Posted by matclone View Post
    We supposedly spend 50% of the total world spending on defense.
    We spend 4-5% of our GDP on defense, I dont care how it compares to the rest of the world. We could cut it back, but the first thing that gets cut is soldiers and bases not weapons or research.

  5. #5

    Default Re: This is for you, UGLY

    Quote Originally Posted by matclone View Post
    We supposedly spend 50% of the total world spending on defense.
    Clone do you have a source for this. I would be curious to see a ranking of who spends the most.

  6. #6
    Olympic Champ RYou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    8,376

    Default Re: This is for you, UGLY

    just heard that the average cab fair from downtown Baghdad to the airport is $ 5000. Who operates the cabs ? Haliburton.
    Life's not the breaths you take, the breathing in and out that gets you through the day ain't what it's all about. It's the moments that take your breath away.

  7. #7
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: This is for you, UGLY

    Quote Originally Posted by Chance174 View Post
    Clone do you have a source for this. I would be curious to see a ranking of who spends the most.
    The only sources I knew of contained some possible bias, which is why I qualified my statement. This looks like a fairly reliable barometer, however, and though it doesn't support the 50% figure it's fairly close, and the outlay is significant via the other countries.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_expenditures

  8. #8

    Default Re: This is for you, UGLY

    Quote Originally Posted by matclone View Post
    The only sources I knew of contained some possible bias, which is why I qualified my statement. This looks like a fairly reliable barometer, however, and though it doesn't support the 50% figure it's fairly close, and the outlay is significant via the other countries.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_expenditures
    Thanks for the link that was pretty interesting.

    I personally have no problem with our current spending considering the wars we are currently fighting. I think the bigger tale is how we are ranked 27th in the world on the % of our GNP we spend on our military.

  9. #9
    World Champ ODH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    3,962

    Default Re: This is for you, UGLY

    Quote Originally Posted by Chance174 View Post
    Thanks for the link that was pretty interesting.

    I personally have no problem with our current spending considering the wars we are currently fighting. I think the bigger tale is how we are ranked 27th in the world on the % of our GNP we spend on our military.
    % of defense spending of GDP is irrelevent. The US still has by far the world's biggest economy. Do we want to be compared to a third world country ran by a tin pot dictator propped up by his military spending?

    Why do we feel the need to spend more on defense that the rest of the world combined? If we decided to 1% of GDP on defense instead 4% we would still be the number spender by over of factor of 2, even though we would move to 140 on the list of % of GDP spending.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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