Defense Spending
When the terrorist attacks occurred on 9/11 it did more than just affect the comfort level of American citizens. It had an all around impact on how this country will be run for years to come. The one economic impact that I will concentrate on is that the attacks, arguably, but directly effected the U.S. GDP (Gross Domestic Product) and how the national budget will be handled from that day forward.
Since the attacks a number of civil defense programs have been initiated, which leads to more departments asking for an allowance within the national budget. This ultimately is leading to a larger and larger deficit that is quickly encompassing full percentage points of our GDP. There is a debate on how much defense spending is actually needed, because during the Clinton administration there were massive cuts to the defense budget, which lead to critics saying that our military force was in question. These same critics said that without the funds that had been cut-off by Clinton the military would spiral down to not being able to defend the homeland, let alone take on any offensive. The one argument I have is that President Bush was not in office long enough for his increased defense budget to take affect when he overthrew two regimes (Afghanistan & Iraq) with the same military force that was said to be completely ineffective because of lack of funds.
Regardless of what the "poor" military was able to accomplish President Bush has promised to make more funds available for national defense and to pay for the occupation
of those under U.S. control. Under this promise on November 24. 2003 the president signed an authorization bill to set aside 401.3 billion dollars for the Department of Defense. This p...
... middle of paper ...
...buy 295 F/A-22 Raptor fighter planes that are from the Cold War era
$74.0 for 30 Virginia-class submarines to add to what is already the best and most up to date submarine force in the world
$16.0 on 650 Comanche helicopters despite the Army eliminating their primary missions of transport and attack
$46.0 to buy 458 V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor helicopters that have continuing safety problems and has already caused the deaths of 23 Marines this year
I am not saying that civilians are losing by putting so much money into military purposes, because without their research spending there would not be some civil resources that are important to everyday life that were developed by the military. There are just many military expenditures that could be cut in order to free up more money for other usages so that the civil economy doesn't have to carry such a burden from it.
“The Price of Military Folly.” U.S. News Online. 1996. 10 April 2000 . Robinson, Linda.
“President Obama’s FY2014 base budget request of $552.0 billion in discretionary budget Authority for the Department of Defense (DOD) and defense-related programs of other agencies (excluding war costs), exceeded by $53.9 billion the legally binding cap on defense funding for FY2014 that was enacted in 2011 as part of the BCA.” Similarly, in their initial actions on the annual defense funding bills for FY2014, the House and the Armed Servi...
Price, Jay. "Reputation Remake: Tilt-rotor Osprey Wins Fans in Afghanistan BY JAY PRICE Read More Here: Http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/09/190817/reputation-remake-tilt-rotor-osprey.html#storylink=cpy." Watching Washington and the World: McClatchy DC. N.p., 9 May 2013. Web. 16 Mar. 2014.
The country needs to start monitoring how the government is spending the federal budget and they need to start splitting it fairly to benefit our country. 83% of the federal budget is spent on the Big Five which are the main expenses in the budget. We have to stop spending it all on the Big Five. Our government should really pay attention to what we need most of in this country and focus on the needs. The government needs to take away 20% of the Big Five and split it to categories that need it.
* There had been several billions of dollars spended since the war on terror began.
The United States is facing a large military budget spending issue with the Department of Defence reporting a cost of around $525.4 billion this past year. Washington Posts announced that, "The United States spent more on its military than the next 13 nations combined in 2011." While military spending is a large part of the government budget, and there is enough room to reduce spending as long as there are a set of precautions of which necessities the government cannot cut.
The military budget alone has increased by about four hundred and ten billion dollars since 2001. That is about fifty billion dollars per year. That money has been put to use, however. A lump sum of
This imposes problems on the military and even on the government. One article states that, “Reduced budgets and the threat of sequestration create a sense of uneasiness in the ranks, and those fears are fueled by politicians willing to shut down the federal government rather than compromise.” (Army Magazine) This is because with the increase of budget cuts they start to cause problems for the ones who are working and this creates lost jobs in the military. No one wants to lose their job not even the ones that have put forth a great amount of time and effort in the military. For the ones that have been in the military for a long period of time this can actually have negative effects on their life style and even cause problems when returning
The U.S. Military is a proud institution, on which we as a nation rely on, just as it relies on the funding and directing of the United States Congress. However, when compared to the rest of the world, the United States consistently outspends other countries on Military/Defense spending. So much so that the National Priorities Project (NPP) states that in 2013 “America spent 37% of the world’s total military spending.” They go on to say that in 2015 “military spending (was) projected to account for 54% of all federal discretionary spending” which equates to about 600 billion dollars in federal spending towards defense and military. While there are benefits of spending this much on Military, many argue that such spending gives America an element
However, in the long-term there is a huge risk of deficit spending hindering economic growth. Economics is a balancing act, I think that if deficit spending is applied in specific areas that are of the greatest need for a very limited period then it is beneficial. I think currently the best reason to increase deficit spending it would be in infrastructure. We hear all the time that our bridges are crumbling, and are far past their life expectancy. We also could use some significant upgrades to our power grid, as well as our internet networks, although those are both controlled solely by private firms. I think in the long-term there needs to be some control to how much deficit is
The U.S budget deficit over the years has been a problem but lately the deficit has shrunk. However, what made the U.S budget deficit get to where it is today and what will it be like in the years to come. Throughout the past the U.S has operated under a deficit. This means that the U.S Spent more money than it was taking in. The cause of the excess in spending was different depending on which year. Some of the causes were war, increase in spending , and economic downturns. There were different acts passed to try and control the deficit problem. The deficit at the present time is declining. This decline is due to the improving economy, sequester, and a tax increase on high-income households. The big factor that went into the decline in the deficit for 2013 was the payment that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made. The deficit decline in the present time may make some think the U.S could get out of debt but it has been projected that the U.S deficit will start to increase once again.
On September 11th, 2000, America was changed forever, with repercussions still being felt today, due to a domestic terrorist attack by the terrorist group al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, which targeted historic locations in the U.S through airline hijackings and suicide attacks, which was done by 19 terrorists. The terrorists had crashed planes in the Twin Towers, The Pentagon, and a failed attempt which resulted in a crashed ¬plane in Pennsylvania. Over 2,996 people had died in total during these terrible attacks. The incident occurred when the first plane, American Airlines Flight 11, was hijacked by terrorists and was crashed into the North Tower at 8:48 a.m. The public was in shock, terrified by the sudden destruction early that morning.
By 2008, $27 billion had been spent on the program and another $27.2 billion was required to complete planned production numbers. Between 2008 and 2011, the estimated lifetime cost for maintaining the V-22 grew by 61 percent, mostly allocated to maintenance and support. With current budget cuts and spending plans the Army will have to make an informed decision on where it will go with the future of Army Aviation fixed wings. Doubling the budget for development is no longer an option as draw downs and spending restraints
Of this total, around $500 billion comprises the base budget which “includes funding for the procurement of military equipment and the daily operations costs of U.S. bases” (Gould & Bender, 2015). Basically, home defense measures amount to over eighty-percent of the nation’s defense budget. With these astronomical figures, one may question whether or not these types of expenditures are excessive when considering the infrequency of attacks on U.S. soil. To further break down this nearly $500 billion base budget, roughly $200 billion is allotted for operations/maintenance, $135 billion for military personnel, $90 billion for procurement, and $65 billion for research/development (Gould & Bender, 2015). In a world where people rush to purchase lottery tickets at the hopes of hitting a jackpot worth a few million, these expenditures are incomprehensible and may seem excessive; however, not everyone feels this way. In an article found on the U.S. Department of Defense’s website, the “DoD has done its best to manage through this prolonged period of budget uncertainty, the secretary said, making painful choices and tradeoffs” and that in “today’s security environment we need to be dynamic and we need to be responsive. What we have now is a straitjacket” (Pellerin, 2015). At the end of the day, it is all about who is being asked whether the defense
Is it really worth to spend a lot of money in military spending? Like the General Peter Schoomaker of the chief of staff of the army said “what does the army really cost?” (Ford, Nelson) there isn’t no easy answer for this because no military department had ever done a full report of the cost of holding its operations. It’s something you can’t put a real limit. How then should real costs be established? By ascertaing the capability necessary to fulfil the U.S security strategy and building budgets to fund those capabilities. We already owe a lot of money to other people. Why put us in more dept. The military believes cutting the defense budget will not aid economy, but they are wrong, cutting the military budget will help out a lot of people in the U.S. people will Have places to stay and have food on their tables. They will have jobs to provide for their family. We may be somewhat defenseless but who are they going to protect if they got nobody to protect. That is why it’s not worth throwing all the money to the government to provide the defense program. We should think twice and think about the people we are putting in