Questions On The Defense Budget

As citizens of the United States of America we must pay taxes to the government. The government takes these taxes and distributes them among different areas to fund each are; one of the highest percentages of spending goes to defense. The whopping amount of around 610 billion dollars makes the United States’ military the largest in the world, so large that its funding out-weighs the next seven highest spending countries. The problem with this is that the military does not really solve the large amount of very important domestic affairs; in fact we barely see the fruits of it. There are many reasons why we should cut down on the percentage spent on defense and focus more on other areas.

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.

Something that I vehemently disagree on with both political parties is defense spending. In their platforms, both parties seem to favor an increase in funding, even if it is a bit more discretely worded under the Democratic Party’s platform. In my view, we allocate too much of our country’s resources to the military, and neglect many of its other needs in doing so. The United States military is by far and away the most puissant armed organization in the world. Here are some figures that help illustrate just how pragmatic that last statement is. In the 2015 fiscal year we spent 598 billion dollars on the military; that’s over fifty percent of the federal government’s discretionary spending.(1) In 2016, only 19 of 194 nations had a higher GDP than America’s defense budget; that means that the U.S. spends more money per year on its military than the total value of all goods produced and services provided in a country in a year in 90 percent of the world’s nations.(2) According to 2016 statistics the U.S. spends more on its defense than the next eight countries combined.(3) That same year, China was second with a 215 billion dollar defense budget and Russia was third at approximately 69 billion.

Since the inception of the United States of America 250 years ago, our government has enacted a practice of lies and deceit that keep its citizens in the dark. Matters such as false allegations that result in long standing wars, financial misuse and abuse, secret alliances that serve the government agenda's, and the altering of history affect not only the US citizens, it affects the global population as a whole. This deception has resulted in mistrust of the US Government as people question what our government is up to and what they are seeking to gain. In order to earn the public's trust, the United States Government needs to be transparent with its citizens, giving us the information whether it's positive or negative instead of allowing

“The federal budget is the yearly plan for how the US government will spend the money it takes from taxes and borrowing.” After thoroughly analyzing the federal budget from 2012, it is unquestionably evident that a majority of the money is being put into a few major categories, leaving room for the rest of the smaller categories to be financially neglected. Is this fair? It seems that the money could be more fairly distributed, and that there is room for cuts in some of the larger categories, to improve the littler ones. In each of the three budget clusters, the US Government should make adjustments in the way it is distributing money; changes involving the big five, the middle

The sequestration that the Obama administration proposed would leave America with the smallest ground force it has ever seen since 1940s, the smallest number of ships since 1915, and the smallest Air Force in history. The Republican Party adamantly opposed the impending defense spending cuts, stating that they were severe and that it would be a disaster to our national security, a decline of our nation’s defense industrial base, and would result in the layoff of more than 1 million skilled workers.

In the past America has been a dominant superpower in the field of military strength, but for the last few decades, our military has encountered abounding liquidations and sequestrations, which lead to huge budget cuts. Nevertheless, America has faced many politicians planning to cut down on our military by virtue of it is simply cost effective. The Clinton Foundation has been cutting our military for countless years. Also, under the Obama Administration has been enacting laws comparable to the Budget Control Act or (BCA) which has been siphoning our military for the past 8 years. For countless years, defense officials remain silent due to the Obama Administration, vaguely America could keep its budget under control. Consequently, all four

The government needs to take more caution creating the federal budget. Edwards stated that “Consider Canada's experience. In the mid-1990s, the federal government faced a debt crisis caused by overspending, which is similar to America's current situation. But the Canadian government reversed course and slashed spending from 23 percent of GDP in 1993, to 17 percent by 2000, to just 15 percent today. The Canadian economy did not sink into a recession from the cuts as Keynesians would have expected but instead grew strongly during the 1990s and 2000s."

There are not any easy ways to cut spending on the military especially since we are in the middle of fighting in Iraq. We can not just pull some troops or provide them with less weapons or supplies then expect them to protect our country as well as they are now. We need a defense budget that matches the new security challenges, not the threats of the last century. We need to recognize that a strong economy is essential for providing the resources to meet future threats; addressing these long-term debts will keep our economy strong.

Lastly, the federal government should consider cutting budgets on the military. There are US troops in 130 countries and there are those who don’t need defending at the time. Then also there are weapons that are not being used in current missions so they are going to waste. The Pentagon should watch its overruns on how much its spending as

Friedman, Uri. “$300,000 an Hour: The Cost of Fighting ISIS”. The Atlantic, The Atlantic. 12

The year 2016 has presented the United States of America’s presidential campaign trail with plenty of national security talk and it remains a separate issue whether any of the candidates’ proposals have been substantial or not. Competitors who wish to secure the Democratic and Republican nominations have given their views concerning national security and troop levels. Contenders in both the Democratic and Republican parties have a view that the best approach for discussing the federal defense and military budget issue with early primary voters is to have a heavy approach on rhetoric and go light on specific strategies. Some of the candidates are calling for an increase

For as long as Americans can remember there has always been a federal deficit. In fact, the only time in American history when there was no federal debt was under president Andrew Jackson, and it only lasted a single year(Wall Street Journal). The federal government never managed to pay off the debt again, although some administrations, like Coolidge’s and Clinton’s, have managed to run brief surpluses(Wall Street Journal). Yet today there seems to be no limit on the debt and deficit spending, and a key question has been pressed into the forefront of politics and fiscal policy, “is

Threats The defense budget of the United States has been declining. Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has revised its military strategies. The Soviet Union's dissolution in 1991 rendered

“We are strengthening our military to ensure that it can prevail in today’s wars; to prevent and deter threats against the United States, its interests, and our allies and partners; and prepare to defend the United States in a wide range of contingencies against state and nonstate actors. We will continue to rebalance our military capabilities to excel at counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, stability operations, and meeting increasingly sophisticated security threats, while ensuring our force is ready to address the full range of military operations.”