HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » So... how incredibly deep...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:55 AM

So... how incredibly deep *are* those sequester cuts to the military?

About 6%.

Oh the humanity!

On the bright side, we'll still spending more than twice as much, as a percentage of GDP, as any other country in the world.

6 replies, 573 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply So... how incredibly deep *are* those sequester cuts to the military? (Original post)
MannyGoldstein Feb 2013 OP
sinkingfeeling Feb 2013 #1
MannyGoldstein Feb 2013 #2
zipplewrath Feb 2013 #3
rurallib Feb 2013 #4
Oilwellian Feb 2013 #5
GeorgeGist Feb 2013 #6

Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:57 AM

1. By my calculations, it's 7.5%. $46B/$613B

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:59 AM

2. I have $711 B in spending, from multiple sources

e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

But they may be wrong - what's your source?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:08 PM

3. The "problem"

The "problem" is that an awful lot of spending isn't on the chopping block in the short term. Savings in the out years (about 2 years or so) can be achieved through lowering/canceling contracts for big ticket items. The short term is different. Some costs can't be cut at all, such as food and basing costs (water, electric, etc.) Current contracts have cancellation terms associated with them, that can mean it "costs as much" to cancel them as let them play out. And they are of course loathe to cut a program only to have sequestration repealed in a few months.

So they are stuck with terminating costs that haven't been incurred, or contracted, yet. So that involves things like cutting back on training exercises, not deploying an aircraft carrier, cutting civilian work hours, reducing travel budgets, etc. That probably approaches vastly more than 6% of that portion of the total budget.

Sequestration was a stupid answer made necessary by a stupid congress unable to do anything competent, much less "smart". Terminating or reducing long term contracts for marginally useful hardware/systems was the primary method they should have chosen. Closing unnecessary facilities was another. Force reduction (simultaneous with commitment reductions overseas) was an "easy" third. But too many of these have "advocates" for them inside congress and they couldn't get it done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:18 PM

4. Is the cost of the current war + drones counted in?

I had heard 5% as the number.
Considering the Pentagon has no idea how much they spend where, they should be able to ignore it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:23 PM

5. Considering their budget has doubled in the past 12 years...

the sequester cuts are a pittance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:28 PM

6. I heard they include the end of ...

flyovers at Army-Navy games whenever a Democrat is President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread