HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » U.S. defense cut could co...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:00 PM

U.S. defense cut could cost billions to implement

The Pentagon may have to pay billions of dollars in termination fees and other contract penalties if Congress does not stop $500 billion in automatic defense spending cuts due to take effect on January 2, a top weapons industry executive said on Wednesday.

Sean O'Keefe, chief executive of the North American unit of Europe's EADS (EAD.PA), said U.S. defense officials were starting to assess added costs that might be triggered by the automatic cuts required under "sequestration," although they have not begun detailed planning for the across-the-board cuts.

O'Keefe, current chairman of the National Defense Industrial Association trade group, was one of a number of industry executives who met with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and other top Pentagon officials on Tuesday to discuss the budget cuts.

Most procurement contracts have clauses requiring termination fees that help companies cover initial investments in tooling for new weapons programs and initial materials costs, but industry executives say those fees will not do much to ease the longer-term pain of the cuts facing the industry.

More at: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-defense-cut-could-cost-221648536.html

4 replies, 737 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 4 replies Author Time Post
Reply U.S. defense cut could cost billions to implement (Original post)
Zorro Jun 2012 OP
DontTreadOnMe Jun 2012 #1
SoutherDem Jun 2012 #2
Proud Liberal Dem Jun 2012 #3
bigbrother05 Jun 2012 #4

Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:07 PM

1. I have no problem paying for the penalties...

but in addition, all politicians who proposed and voted for these bad contracts lose all their benefits and pensions. Hey, someone has to pay for these mistakes... public workers all over the country are losing their pensions due to lack of funds... and politicians are public workers, correct?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:08 PM

2. So were damned if we do, and we are damned if we don't?

I scanned the article but didn't see the cost. Are we talking about 2% or 3%?

I am not for excessive defense spending but what is the cost in jobs?

Doesn't every cut in government equal job cuts?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:20 PM

3. Well

both parties agreed to these cuts as a *penalty* for not coming to some kind of agreement on deficit reduction. The Republicans held the line against any kind of balanced proposal and the "Supercommittee" failed, so now the bitter pill will have to be swallowed. Did they really NOT think about how this would work (or not work for the economy) when they passed the so-called "Budget Control Act"?

Idiots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:49 PM

4. Soldier pay and weapons will be paid for first

Then housing and utility costs. After that, quality of life and maybe medical care. Then after new construction, maintenance of existing military facilities and civilian pay will compete for what's leftover.

Only the most superficial of weapon dollars will be touched, too many former generals/admirals depend on the extra cash to make ends meet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread