{"id":28227,"date":"2012-01-07T03:30:24","date_gmt":"2012-01-07T07:30:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/valorguardians.com\/blog\/?p=28227"},"modified":"2012-01-07T06:08:21","modified_gmt":"2012-01-07T10:08:21","slug":"laying-the-political-groundwork-for-devastating-security-investment-and-defense-sector-job-cuts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/?p=28227","title":{"rendered":"Laying the political groundwork for devastating security disinvestment and defense sector job cuts"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>They&#8217;re coming. They&#8217;re real. After the initial rounds of cuts initiated by the Democrats and then the bi-partisan failure to insulate our national defense from indiscriminate slash and burn budgeting we are now on the precipice of the enfeebled 90&#8217;s military with 21st century commitments and enemies. The cynical tilling of the field for these cuts by the anti-military Left has been deliberate and systematic. <\/p>\n<p>Not to say that the adolescent libertarian Right is without blame. Welcome to the hell paved with stupid intentions. Any doubt about the cross-cultural nature of this stupidity can be quickly remedied by <a href=\"http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=WsUlkUaJnE0\">simple Google searches<\/a>. Yep, that&#8217;s the perennially useless Barney Frank side by side with Chemtrail hero Ron Paul. Go get &#8217;em guys!<\/p>\n<p>We should start with the testing ground of all new talking points in politics, the internet. Here we have on the &#8220;Real News Network&#8217;s&#8221; hosting the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.huffingtonpost.com\/jo-comerford\/cashing-in-the-war-divide_b_327287.html\">unbiased Jo Comerfor<\/a>d of the &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.discoverthenetworks.org\/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7361\">National Priorities Project<\/a>&#8220;, going on about military cuts:<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" width=\"560\" height=\"315\" src=\"http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/RYaqrt15ViM\" frameborder=\"0\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>A significant yet tired piece of propaganda emerges from this video. Comerford begins with, and ultimately relies upon, the idiot&#8217;s impression of the federal budget: that federal discretionary spending constitutes the most important, even most substantial, portion of government spending. It&#8217;s important to note that after her tired charade, which attempts to impress on the viewer that the portion of federal spending which constitutes military spending is the lion&#8217;s share, the circus master chimes in around the 3:00 minute mark with the reinforcing: &#8220;&#8230;because the military represents such a bigger portion of the overall budget.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Oh, really?<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>The federal discretionary budget, of which nearly all of military spending falls, accounts for about 1\/3rd of all federal spending. Of overall government expenditures, in our intentionally localized Republic, approximately half is at the state and municipal level. In other words the federal discretionary budget account for about 1\/6th of total government expenditures. In total, including all the possible defense related expenditures, such as multiple serving government functions like the Coast Guard and FBI Counter Terrorism, VA, etc spending that she prattles on about. The total amount of government expenditures on our security is <a href=\"http:\/\/www.usgovernmentspending.com\/united_states_total_spending_pie_chart\">about 15%<\/a>. So much for a &#8220;bigger portion&#8221;. Or even a bigger portion once the relief the VA gives to Social Security and Medicare\/Medicaid by covering what would otherwise be those programs beneficiaries, for that matter.<\/p>\n<p>My attention next turns to the insular and irrationally leftist word of academia, so irreparably overrun by bankrupt radicals in the 1960s. Keep your eyes peeled because <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ips-dc.org\/reports\/071001-jobcreation.pdf\">a recent study<\/a> out of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst will be frequently cited in the coming month by various Progressive and Liberal talking heads to illustrate the &#8220;wisdom&#8221; in executing their pro-welfare, anti-military agenda. If it doesn&#8217;t end up footnoted on a segment of the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.discoverthenetworks.org\/individualProfile.asp?indid=2345\">Rachel Maddow Show<\/a> at least once I&#8217;ll be amazed.<\/p>\n<p>Now aside for &#8220;tax cuts for personal consumption&#8221; (i.e. letting you keep your money) this study offers the conclusion that defense spending is the least productive form of public spending available. The most productive? Why for them of them of course it&#8217;s an &#8220;education&#8221;. As if the trawling hoards of <a href=\"http:\/\/idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com\/2011\/10\/occupy-wall-street-demographic-survey-results-will-surprise-you.php\">meticulously educated students<\/a> without jobs and supported by the e<a href=\"http:\/\/www.csmonitor.com\/USA\/Politics\/2011\/1101\/Who-is-Occupy-Wall-Street-After-six-weeks-a-profile-finally-emerges\/%28page%29\/2\">lite bourgeois liberal establishment<\/a> throwing adolescent tantrums about the job market&#8217;s disinterest wasn&#8217;t enough to dissuade the notion that academia is serving an indispensable and reproachless job for our nation now. Or most simply, as an astute commentator on Naked Capitalism commented, they&#8217;re &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.nakedcapitalism.com\/2009\/11\/guest-post-confirmed-defense-spending-creates-fewer-jobs-than-other-types-of-spending.html#comment-65847\">talking book<\/a>&#8220;.<\/p>\n<p>Lastly the New York Times <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2012\/01\/07\/us\/a-hidden-cost-of-military-cuts-could-be-invention-and-its-industries.html\">jumps into the fray<\/a> with the intent of heading off criticism at the pass. The Times know that the sheer economics of slashing into a budget which supports over 6 million workers while <a href=\"http:\/\/www.newsday.com\/classifieds\/jobs\/employers-add-200-000-jobs-unemployment-at-8-5-1.3432781\">trumpeting 200k new jobs<\/a> this month is both endemic and politically untenable in the US. So they belatedly acknowledge:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8230;as the Pentagon confronts the prospect of cutting its budget by about 10 percent over the next decade, even some people who do not count themselves among its traditional allies warn that the potential impact on scientific innovation is being overlooked. Spending less on military research, they say, could reduce the economy\u2019s long-term growth.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIf catalyzing innovation is going to be an important part of our economic strategy, then we better be careful how we handle\u201d the military budget, said Daniel Sarewitz, director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University. \u201cI\u2019d like to see a lot less weapons and a lot less focus on them, but it\u2019s not all about that.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In the political debate over Pentagon cuts, the potential effect on innovation has been largely ignored. Pentagon officials and their allies have instead warned that a sharply smaller military budget would expose the nation to harm, and that such cuts would result in a large and immediate rise in unemployment.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Now of course they slip in jabs such as&#8230;<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The wellspring of this prosperity is not just the Defense Department\u2019s vast payroll, nor just the fat profit margins of its contractors.<br \/>\n&#8212;<br \/>\nIndependent economists and analysts say that concern about the short-term economic impact is largely misplaced. While reducing the Pentagon\u2019s budget would cause considerable economic pain \u2014 some workers would lose their jobs; some contractors would lose their most important customer \u2014 research suggests it would be less painful than cutting other kinds of government spending, like education or transportation.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>I do wonder&#8230;which &#8220;independent economists&#8221; and researchers are we talking about? I can hazard a guess.<\/p>\n<p>Uh, oh&#8230;wait for it&#8230;here it comes&#8230;<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\u201cAs a source of job creation, military spending is not particularly good,\u201d said <strong>Robert Pollin, an economist at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.<\/strong>\u201cYou can argue for the benefits in geopolitical terms, but if we\u2019re talking about jobs and the economy, it doesn\u2019t make sense.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Oh, yes. Of course.<\/p>\n<p>So, in the end, you might ask: what&#8217;s the point? My point is simple. Don&#8217;accept &#8220;leading experts&#8221; or &#8220;independent economists&#8221;. My point is to follow that footnote, Google that name, put a face to a name and figure out who is undercutting your security and why. Click that link. Dive into that Rabbit Hole.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>They&#8217;re coming. They&#8217;re real. After the initial rounds of cuts initiated by the Democrats and then &hellip; <a title=\"Laying the political groundwork for devastating security disinvestment and defense sector job cuts\" class=\"hm-read-more\" href=\"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/?p=28227\"><span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Laying the political groundwork for devastating security disinvestment and defense sector job cuts<\/span>Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":619,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[186,46,189,84],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-28227","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-2012-election","category-barack-obama","category-defense-cuts","category-military-issues"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28227","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/619"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=28227"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28227\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=28227"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=28227"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=28227"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}