OT: One man takes a stand against socialism

[Anonymous]

[quote=svelte][…] you volunteered for that environment where those parameters (fixed pay, healthcare, etc) were well known going in.[/quote]

I did volunteer, and have no complaints. I actually made out pretty well in my military career.

I have no issue with small amounts of socialism when applied in the right way. The military should be run as a command economy. But we have too much military spending, and for the wrong reasons. In other words, we have too much socialism.

Any government spending that has no value is a bad thing. Giving it the label of “defense” spending doesn’t change this. Using taxpayer funds to build stuff that nobody wants is throwing money away, period.

Lots of people today are griping about government programs, calling them “socialist.” But many of these same people don’t seem to have a problem with growing military spending. The biggest part of the federal budget is getting bigger – for the wrong reasons.

We have a huge component of defense spending that exits just to subsidize the economy. Remember when the USSR claimed 100% employment? How did they pull that off? By making everyone a government employee (many of them military) and paying them to do things that brought no economic value. How did that work out for them in the long run?

We are doing the same thing today in the defense industry. Taxing the public and redistributing the wealth through the military-industrial complex. It is no different than the socialist systems of the USSR and North Korea, but some folks can’t see it that way because they’ve been duped into thinking that labeling the government-controlled defense economy as socialist would somehow be un-American.

The purpose of the military should be defense, not economic stimulus. Our military spending is comparable to the rest of the world combined (including or allies.) There is no conceivable way that this amount of spending is necessary for our protection. The only explanation is that most of it is simply a glorified worker/welfare program.

Many try to rationalize defense spending by exaggerating the terrorist threat. “Hey, we found a lone amateur with a propane bomb in his car – we better build another aircraft carrier to keep us safe!”

Look at the breakdown of the federal budget. There is no mathematical way we can reduce the deficits long-term without massive cuts in defense spending.

I’m glad to see that at least Gates has a clue.

[briansd1]

pri_dk, thank your from bringing this issue to the fore.

Before of my liberal leanings, had I posted something like this people would have labeled me un-American.

We are providing defense welfare to the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese. We are the policemen of the world and we are sending our men and women to die abroad. For what?

I agree that our military spending is ridiculous. If we don’t watch it will spend ourselves to the poor house.

I too am glad that Robert Gates had a clue.

[briansd1]

pri_dk, thank your from bringing this issue to the fore.

Before of my liberal leanings, had I posted something like this people would have labeled me un-American.

We are providing defense welfare to the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese. We are the policemen of the world and we are sending our men and women to die abroad. For what?

I agree that our military spending is ridiculous. If we don’t watch it will spend ourselves to the poor house.

I too am glad that Robert Gates had a clue.

[briansd1]

pri_dk, thank your from bringing this issue to the fore.

Before of my liberal leanings, had I posted something like this people would have labeled me un-American.

We are providing defense welfare to the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese. We are the policemen of the world and we are sending our men and women to die abroad. For what?

I agree that our military spending is ridiculous. If we don’t watch it will spend ourselves to the poor house.

I too am glad that Robert Gates had a clue.

[briansd1]

pri_dk, thank your from bringing this issue to the fore.

Before of my liberal leanings, had I posted something like this people would have labeled me un-American.

We are providing defense welfare to the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese. We are the policemen of the world and we are sending our men and women to die abroad. For what?

I agree that our military spending is ridiculous. If we don’t watch it will spend ourselves to the poor house.

I too am glad that Robert Gates had a clue.

[briansd1]

pri_dk, thank your from bringing this issue to the fore.

Before of my liberal leanings, had I posted something like this people would have labeled me un-American.

We are providing defense welfare to the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese. We are the policemen of the world and we are sending our men and women to die abroad. For what?

I agree that our military spending is ridiculous. If we don’t watch it will spend ourselves to the poor house.

I too am glad that Robert Gates had a clue.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]pri_dk, thank your from bringing this issue to the fore.

Before of my liberal leanings, had I posted something like this people would have labeled me un-American.

We are providing defense welfare to the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese. We are the policemen of the world and we are sending our men and women to die abroad. For what?

I agree that our military spending is ridiculous. If we don’t watch it will spend ourselves to the poor house.

I too am glad that Robert Gates had a clue.[/quote]

Brian: Why don’t you send an open letter to your guy, Obama, and point out the same things? After all, he just instituted the largest defense budget in the history of the Republic.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]pri_dk, thank your from bringing this issue to the fore.

Before of my liberal leanings, had I posted something like this people would have labeled me un-American.

We are providing defense welfare to the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese. We are the policemen of the world and we are sending our men and women to die abroad. For what?

I agree that our military spending is ridiculous. If we don’t watch it will spend ourselves to the poor house.

I too am glad that Robert Gates had a clue.[/quote]

Brian: Why don’t you send an open letter to your guy, Obama, and point out the same things? After all, he just instituted the largest defense budget in the history of the Republic.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]pri_dk, thank your from bringing this issue to the fore.

Before of my liberal leanings, had I posted something like this people would have labeled me un-American.

We are providing defense welfare to the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese. We are the policemen of the world and we are sending our men and women to die abroad. For what?

I agree that our military spending is ridiculous. If we don’t watch it will spend ourselves to the poor house.

I too am glad that Robert Gates had a clue.[/quote]

Brian: Why don’t you send an open letter to your guy, Obama, and point out the same things? After all, he just instituted the largest defense budget in the history of the Republic.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]pri_dk, thank your from bringing this issue to the fore.

Before of my liberal leanings, had I posted something like this people would have labeled me un-American.

We are providing defense welfare to the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese. We are the policemen of the world and we are sending our men and women to die abroad. For what?

I agree that our military spending is ridiculous. If we don’t watch it will spend ourselves to the poor house.

I too am glad that Robert Gates had a clue.[/quote]

Brian: Why don’t you send an open letter to your guy, Obama, and point out the same things? After all, he just instituted the largest defense budget in the history of the Republic.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]pri_dk, thank your from bringing this issue to the fore.

Before of my liberal leanings, had I posted something like this people would have labeled me un-American.

We are providing defense welfare to the Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese. We are the policemen of the world and we are sending our men and women to die abroad. For what?

I agree that our military spending is ridiculous. If we don’t watch it will spend ourselves to the poor house.

I too am glad that Robert Gates had a clue.[/quote]

Brian: Why don’t you send an open letter to your guy, Obama, and point out the same things? After all, he just instituted the largest defense budget in the history of the Republic.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=pri_dk]

We have a huge component of defense spending that exits just to subsidize the economy. Remember when the USSR claimed 100% employment? How did they pull that off? By making everyone a government employee (many of them military) and paying them to do things that brought no economic value. How did that work out for them in the long run?

We are doing the same thing today in the defense industry. Taxing the public and redistributing the wealth through the military-industrial complex. It is no different than the socialist systems of the USSR and North Korea, but some folks can’t see it that way because they’ve been duped into thinking that labeling the government-controlled defense economy as socialist would somehow be un-American.

The purpose of the military should be defense, not economic stimulus. Our military spending is comparable to the rest of the world combined (including or allies.) There is no conceivable way that this amount of spending is necessary for our protection. The only explanation is that most of it is simply a glorified worker/welfare program.

[/quote]

Pri: I spent my years in the Army during the waning years of the Cold War (1983 – 1988) and as part of Reagan’s “Million Man Army”. I think during the Cold War one could make a legitimate case for spending the dollars we did on defense and that spending ultimately ended the Soviet Union.

However, you cannot make that same case now, and even lining up the Chinese, Russians, NKoreans and Iranians, we’d be hard-pressed to not only justify the dollars, but some of the programs as well. The C-17 is an excellent example of unnecessary spending, as is the F-35. However, they are outstanding pork programs and defense contractors have learned to subcontract out through various congressional districts to keep the support in place.

We need to cut defense, along with entitlement spending and we need to raise taxes. I realize, as a conservative, that represents a marked departure from ideology, but we’re rapidly approaching the point of no return and need to learn the lessons of Greece, Japan and the larger Euro-zone.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=pri_dk]

We have a huge component of defense spending that exits just to subsidize the economy. Remember when the USSR claimed 100% employment? How did they pull that off? By making everyone a government employee (many of them military) and paying them to do things that brought no economic value. How did that work out for them in the long run?

We are doing the same thing today in the defense industry. Taxing the public and redistributing the wealth through the military-industrial complex. It is no different than the socialist systems of the USSR and North Korea, but some folks can’t see it that way because they’ve been duped into thinking that labeling the government-controlled defense economy as socialist would somehow be un-American.

The purpose of the military should be defense, not economic stimulus. Our military spending is comparable to the rest of the world combined (including or allies.) There is no conceivable way that this amount of spending is necessary for our protection. The only explanation is that most of it is simply a glorified worker/welfare program.

[/quote]

Pri: I spent my years in the Army during the waning years of the Cold War (1983 – 1988) and as part of Reagan’s “Million Man Army”. I think during the Cold War one could make a legitimate case for spending the dollars we did on defense and that spending ultimately ended the Soviet Union.

However, you cannot make that same case now, and even lining up the Chinese, Russians, NKoreans and Iranians, we’d be hard-pressed to not only justify the dollars, but some of the programs as well. The C-17 is an excellent example of unnecessary spending, as is the F-35. However, they are outstanding pork programs and defense contractors have learned to subcontract out through various congressional districts to keep the support in place.

We need to cut defense, along with entitlement spending and we need to raise taxes. I realize, as a conservative, that represents a marked departure from ideology, but we’re rapidly approaching the point of no return and need to learn the lessons of Greece, Japan and the larger Euro-zone.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=pri_dk]

We have a huge component of defense spending that exits just to subsidize the economy. Remember when the USSR claimed 100% employment? How did they pull that off? By making everyone a government employee (many of them military) and paying them to do things that brought no economic value. How did that work out for them in the long run?

We are doing the same thing today in the defense industry. Taxing the public and redistributing the wealth through the military-industrial complex. It is no different than the socialist systems of the USSR and North Korea, but some folks can’t see it that way because they’ve been duped into thinking that labeling the government-controlled defense economy as socialist would somehow be un-American.

The purpose of the military should be defense, not economic stimulus. Our military spending is comparable to the rest of the world combined (including or allies.) There is no conceivable way that this amount of spending is necessary for our protection. The only explanation is that most of it is simply a glorified worker/welfare program.

[/quote]

Pri: I spent my years in the Army during the waning years of the Cold War (1983 – 1988) and as part of Reagan’s “Million Man Army”. I think during the Cold War one could make a legitimate case for spending the dollars we did on defense and that spending ultimately ended the Soviet Union.

However, you cannot make that same case now, and even lining up the Chinese, Russians, NKoreans and Iranians, we’d be hard-pressed to not only justify the dollars, but some of the programs as well. The C-17 is an excellent example of unnecessary spending, as is the F-35. However, they are outstanding pork programs and defense contractors have learned to subcontract out through various congressional districts to keep the support in place.

We need to cut defense, along with entitlement spending and we need to raise taxes. I realize, as a conservative, that represents a marked departure from ideology, but we’re rapidly approaching the point of no return and need to learn the lessons of Greece, Japan and the larger Euro-zone.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=pri_dk]

We have a huge component of defense spending that exits just to subsidize the economy. Remember when the USSR claimed 100% employment? How did they pull that off? By making everyone a government employee (many of them military) and paying them to do things that brought no economic value. How did that work out for them in the long run?

We are doing the same thing today in the defense industry. Taxing the public and redistributing the wealth through the military-industrial complex. It is no different than the socialist systems of the USSR and North Korea, but some folks can’t see it that way because they’ve been duped into thinking that labeling the government-controlled defense economy as socialist would somehow be un-American.

The purpose of the military should be defense, not economic stimulus. Our military spending is comparable to the rest of the world combined (including or allies.) There is no conceivable way that this amount of spending is necessary for our protection. The only explanation is that most of it is simply a glorified worker/welfare program.

[/quote]

Pri: I spent my years in the Army during the waning years of the Cold War (1983 – 1988) and as part of Reagan’s “Million Man Army”. I think during the Cold War one could make a legitimate case for spending the dollars we did on defense and that spending ultimately ended the Soviet Union.

However, you cannot make that same case now, and even lining up the Chinese, Russians, NKoreans and Iranians, we’d be hard-pressed to not only justify the dollars, but some of the programs as well. The C-17 is an excellent example of unnecessary spending, as is the F-35. However, they are outstanding pork programs and defense contractors have learned to subcontract out through various congressional districts to keep the support in place.

We need to cut defense, along with entitlement spending and we need to raise taxes. I realize, as a conservative, that represents a marked departure from ideology, but we’re rapidly approaching the point of no return and need to learn the lessons of Greece, Japan and the larger Euro-zone.

[Author]

Posts