Check this out! Pentagon cuts don't cut it. Want to really save money? Get a new security strategy.

[1776Forever]

Pentagon cuts don't cut it. Want to really save money? Get a new security strategy.

Billions in Pentagon cuts touted by Gates and Obama recently don’t represent real decreases to defense spending. With troops in more than 150 of the world's 195 countries, the US needs to abandon its cold-war era deployment strategy. It's time for our wealthy allies to pull their weight.

By Charles V. Peña / February 2, 2011

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0202/Pentagon-cuts-don-t-cut-it.-Want-to-really-save-money-Get-a-new-security-strategy

Washington

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recently announced that the Department of Defense (DoD) had found “at least $100 billion in savings” and that he was “curtailing or canceling troubled or excess programs that would have cost more than $300 billion if seen through to completion.” President Obama, in his recent State of the Union address, echoed Gates’ proposal to cut defense spending. These "cuts," however, should not be confused with an actual, immediate reduction in current defense spending....

US defense spending out of whack

The $600-plus billion a year the US spends on defense is roughly what the entire rest of the world combined spends on defense – yet the entire world isn’t our enemy or a military threat. China is often cited as the next big threat on the horizon, but the US still significantly outspends the Chinese on defense. Moreover, with wealthy allies such as Japan and South Korea, why does the US alone have to shoulder the burden of the Chinese challenge (assuming China is indeed a future threat)? And why do we wring our hands in great angst over North Korea and Iran when US defense spending is larger than the gross domestic product (GDP) of either country? (In fact, it eclipses the GDP of all but about 20 of the richest countries in the world).


(much more at link)

..................

Is it that hard to understand that quality of life is as important as freedom and goes hand in hand? Think about it!

I just posted proposed cuts to HUD to 2008 levels by this Congress - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=354917&mesg_id=354917
and wanted to share this to balance where the money is really going!

[Lifelong Protester]

1. Thank you, 1776Forever!

I read your other post and clicked the link, and made phone calls to my senators and congressman. I did not have this latest link, but I mentioned at the end of each message, how about we bring some of the troops deployed around the world home and quit spending so much on a military budget we do not need to keep at cold war status. I asked that we buy a few less tanks and fighter planes, but heck, I should have said 'GET OUT OF________' (you name the base).

[1776Forever]

2. Thank you - We are so in the dark about the real spending that goes on in D.C. Time for change! n/t

[Lifelong Protester]

3. I couldn't agree more.

And in a play on the old saying from the 60s "Do we fear our enemies more than we love our citizens?"

[Sherman A1]

4. Precisely

:toast:

[hgrubkcir1]

5. My 5-year Proposal to Balance the Budget

The proposal which follows is not one I would have agreed to
support in a perfect world.

It has though been reviewed by those I respect in the
academic, business and public sectors.

Further it has been debated by those on the left and right as
well as moderates of both parties.

 As you would assume, the sacrifice it mandates to balance the
budget is shared. The proposal does directly address  the
heart of our fiscal deficit crisis.

The proposal only addresses the budgetary reduction
initiatives which were included in my copyrighted essays,
“Resurrecting Common Sense in America,” written two years
prior to the Deficit Commission’s recommendations.

Due to the depth of understanding already encompassed and
researched in this matter, my remarks for your consideration
will be brief.

 Additionally, owing to the need for bi-partisan support
necessary for implementation of the proposed legislative
initiatives, they are addressed in their most generic form.

       1) Reduce federal deficits from Medicare/Medicaid 
           a.	Enact a 1% employee/employer payroll tax for the
purpose of developing a funding source to minimize general
fund obligations for Medicare/Medicaid.
           b.	Enact a New Federal Fee Schedule to minimize the
cost of all prescription drugs provided to Medicare/Medicaid
recipients.
           c.	Enact Tort Reform to limit the liabilities for
all Medicare/Medicaid services to only “gross negligence and
fraud.”
       2) Until “comprehensive federal tax code revision”
enacted extend Bush Tax cuts indefinitely.
           a.	Enact a new “stepped” surcharge rate for
individual per schedule.
           b.	Enact a new “stepped” long-term capital gains
tax. 
           c.	Enact a new “stepped” federal surcharge on
gasoline.
        3) Reduce total defense spending.
        4) Reduce discretionary spending.

While I am fully aware, opposition to the proposed initiative
remains significant particularly at the extremes of both
political spectrums, history does lend support to the concept,
America’s belief in her entitlement programs need to continue
can super-seed even partisan attack.

I note both the bi-partisan work of President Reagan and
Speaker O’Neil in restructuring Social Security during the
1980’s and the work of President Clinton with Congress in the
1990’s in developing a balanced budget as a second example.

In my proposal, conservative American’s would  receive their
mandated  “SPENDING CUTS” with over $600 Billion in reductions
by FY 15-16 using FY 09-10 as the base year. 

The second largest deficit reduction component of the proposal
comes from Medicare/Medicaid.

American can no longer afford to provide that entitlement
benefits to her citizens without paying for them with a
specific tax source exclusive of FICA contributions which
support Part A expenses.

Similar to what Speaker O’Neil and President Reagan
accomplished in refinancing Social Security, my proposal calls
for a 1% increase in FICA taxes as a contribution for both
employees and employers.

Our country’s need to create jobs is not ignored in my
proposal. The right gets a decrease in individual long-term
Capital Gains taxes which has the benefit of being considered
the most effective means to actually increase employment by
developing additional assets to allow our post-retirement age
seniors still working to retire vacating their current
employment status.

While an increase in the Federal Gasoline Tax remains nearly
universally opposed in polling, the tax has not increased from
its current 18 cents per gallon rate since 1993 and must be
increased. The tax increase would both greatly address our
infra-structure liabilities and as a means to increase
nationwide employment permanently in the construction and
manufacturing sector.

This generic bi-partisan proposal is far from perfect but is
the result of nearly three years of debate and analysis based
on the principles laid out in my essay series Resurrecting
Common Sense in America.

It does not incorporate my initiative to legislate into
existence a new long-term Treasury investment which carries a
zero federal tax burden due to the current state of the
economy and its possible adverse effect on equity values.

The proposal additionally does not address the issue of
securing tax revenues from our now more than 11 million
illegal immigrates.

The proposal’s tabled recommendations follow for your review.


Fiscal 		Surcharge	Rate 		Surcharge	Reduction       Reduction
Year		 Tax above	Long Term	Federal 		Defense        
Discretionary  
                 $750,000 	Cap. Gains	Gas Tax		Spending	      
 Spending
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
FY 11-12	 	1.00%	 	3.00%	 	$0.05	 	5.00%	 	2.00%
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
FY 12-13	 	2.00%	 	6.00%	 	$0.10	 	7.50%	 	4.00%
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
FY 13-14	 	3.00%	 	9.00%	 	$0.15	        10.00%	 	6.00%
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
FY 14-15	 	4.00%	       12.00%	 	$0.20       	12.50%	       
8.00%
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
FY 15-16	 	5.00%	       15.00%	 	$0.25	         15.00%	      
10.00%

Analysis Assumptions:										
	1	GDP increases in aggregate 12% through 10-1-2016
	2	Unemployment decreases to 6.5% through 10-1-2016
	3	Defense spending reduction is based on "Peace
Dividend"
	4	Surcharge Tax is enacted with legislated exemptions to
income.
	5	Surcharge Tax on Gas is enacted with legislated exemptions.
	6	Reduction in Discretionary Spending based from FY 09-10
budget.


Notes:										
*		27% Scheduled Doctor Fix is fully implemented		

To my fellow American's who are both offended and troubled by
the scope and magnitude of my proposal, I can assure you, I
share your concern.

All I can say to you is, "If we can balance our federal
budget by 2015-2016, our children and our children's children
will thank us for the sacrifice made to return Common Sense to
our American Agenda.

[DavidDvorkin]

6. "Pull their weight" implies that there's a weight to be pulled

Most of what we do isn't needed. Certainly it doesn't defend democracy. Why should our wealthy allies step up to the plate if they don't feel that anyone needs to play that game?