Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Mutatis Mutandis

(90 posts)
46. that chart is incorrect, as it hides approx. half of the actual war machine/CIA/NSA/DHS total
Tue Feb 12, 2013, 05:50 PM
Feb 2013

and this is from 2011, so rest assured it is actually higher

The Real U.S. National Security Budget, The Figure No One Wants You to See

http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175361/


What if you went to a restaurant and found it rather pricey? Still, you ordered your meal and, when done, picked up the check only to discover that it was almost twice the menu price.

Welcome to the world of the real U.S. national security budget. Normally, in media accounts, you hear about the Pentagon budget and the war-fighting supplementary funds passed by Congress for our conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. That already gets you into a startling price range -- close to $700 billion for 2012 -- but that’s barely more than half of it. If Americans were ever presented with the real bill for the total U.S. national security budget, it would actually add up to more than $1.2 trillion a year.


Take that in for a moment. It’s true; you won’t find that figure in your daily newspaper or on your nightly newscast, but it’s no misprint. It may even be an underestimate. In any case, it’s the real thing when it comes to your tax dollars. The simplest way to grasp just how Americans could pay such a staggering amount annually for “security” is to go through what we know about the U.S. national security budget, step by step, and add it all up.

So, here we go. Buckle your seat belt: it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Fortunately for us, on February 14th the Obama administration officially released its Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 budget request. Of course, it hasn’t been passed by Congress -- even the 2011 budget hasn’t made it through that august body yet -- but at least we have the most recent figures available for our calculations. For 2012, the White House has requested $558 billion for the Pentagon’s annual “base” budget, plus an additional $118 billion to fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. At $676 billion, that’s already nothing to sneeze at, but it’s just the barest of beginnings when it comes to what American taxpayers will actually spend on national security. Think of it as the gigantic tip of a humongous iceberg.

To get closer to a real figure, it’s necessary to start peeking at other parts of the federal budget where so many other pots of security spending are squirreled away...............................

snip
----------------------------

full details at the link above

lowering the eligibility age to 55 and properly funding it should be on the table. Warren Stupidity Feb 2013 #1
lowering the eligibility age to 0 and properly funding it should be on the table. Vincardog Feb 2013 #2
+1 zipplewrath Feb 2013 #4
Adding younger healthier people would IMPROVE Medicare's finances because Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #5
well sure, but I'd accept incremental forward progress too. Warren Stupidity Feb 2013 #11
Lowering it to CONCEPTION is the only appropriate action, IMHO. kestrel91316 Feb 2013 #35
This would accomplish exactly the opposite of reducing costs flamingdem Feb 2013 #3
rasing the cap should help also Coolest Ranger Feb 2013 #6
It's currently $113,700 Yo_Mama Feb 2013 #40
Thanks for correcting me ont he payment amount Coolest Ranger Feb 2013 #44
The president should order a permanent hold on the DoD budget, Hard Assets Feb 2013 #7
Defense spending is less than 20% of the federal budget. Yo_Mama Feb 2013 #41
that chart is incorrect, as it hides approx. half of the actual war machine/CIA/NSA/DHS total Mutatis Mutandis Feb 2013 #46
One less outrage of the month for a small but vocal OKNancy Feb 2013 #8
EXACTLY!! SkyDaddy7 Feb 2013 #36
Social Security COLA indexing is still "on the table", this is not what I voted for. xtraxritical Feb 2013 #43
I am permanently disabled & rely totally on SS... SkyDaddy7 Feb 2013 #47
Obama should scream at the Republicans that SS does not add a penny to the deficit. xtraxritical Feb 2013 #48
I'm sure the hundreds of thousands of people loading the White House email with comments against-- eridani Feb 2013 #37
He's putting Chained CPI on the table so seniors will get hurt that way instead. forestpath Feb 2013 #9
<sigh> DainBramaged Feb 2013 #10
So this article is wrong? forestpath Feb 2013 #12
I'll wait before I jump to conclusions DainBramaged Feb 2013 #22
It's not just the Washington Post. forestpath Feb 2013 #24
Whatever DainBramaged Feb 2013 #25
I didn't "find" you. You posted to me. And I used the Obama administration's own words forestpath Feb 2013 #31
Buh Bye DainBramaged Feb 2013 #34
Medicare eligibility is a much bigger deal, nt geek tragedy Feb 2013 #13
Hurting vulnerable people at all is a big deal, at least to me it is -and I will never gloss over it forestpath Feb 2013 #15
Only when you are desperate to defend the indefensible MotherPetrie Feb 2013 #16
He won't when he hears the outcry from across the nation if he does. n/t Cleita Feb 2013 #19
The Obama bashers will just find something else to harp about. nt EastKYLiberal Feb 2013 #14
So you're OK with Obama wanting to stick it to old people dependent on SS. Got it. MotherPetrie Feb 2013 #17
That's been predicted about 10 times since Obama took office. JoePhilly Feb 2013 #26
keep the meme alive! snooper2 Feb 2013 #28
I'll wait until he actually does one of those things... JuniperLea Feb 2013 #29
I will continue to loudly voice my opposition to making any changes to Social Security and the xtraxritical Feb 2013 #49
Wow... JuniperLea Feb 2013 #50
I do, jealous ? xtraxritical Feb 2013 #51
We need comprehensive protection not only for Social Security but for pensions across the board. JDPriestly Feb 2013 #20
Oh, I think they'll find a way Cha Feb 2013 #33
Thank God. This will save lives. Cleita Feb 2013 #18
Wow! How brave. Dawgs Feb 2013 #21
They Must have,just now ,looked at the Polls bahrbearian Feb 2013 #23
accurate to say it's been taken off the table Enrique Feb 2013 #27
I love a good yes or no answer... JuniperLea Feb 2013 #30
Thanks cal.. Cha Feb 2013 #32
Delay to death! Dustlawyer Feb 2013 #38
That's good news Liberalynn Feb 2013 #39
But cutting Medicare and SS is very much ON the table Yo_Mama Feb 2013 #42
2 words: SINGLE PAYER Mutatis Mutandis Feb 2013 #45
good! Try going for a job after you're laid off at age 60 wordpix Feb 2013 #52
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»White House: Raising Medi...»Reply #46