During his first post-inauguration visit to the Pentagon, President Trump today signed an executive order for what he described as the start of a “great rebuilding of the Armed Forces,” seeking to increase the size of the US military, which already spends roughly as much as the eight next largest militaries in the world.
Trump promised the plan would include new warplanes, new ships, new resources, and in increase in the number of special forces. The order calls for the Pentagon and Office of Management and Budget to work jointly on increasing military spending in the next fiscal year, and in ways that will give the Pentagon chief more flexibility on spending.
Exactly how much bigger the 2018 military budget is going to end up being is unclear, as analysts have estimated things like the planned increase in warships adding a massive amount both in construction costs and in maintenance. At the same time, the Trump plan calls for reducing spending on projects not considered “highest priority.”
That’s potentially difficult, however, as the costliest weapons projects, even those the Pentagon is relatively ambivalent about, tend to carefully spread their spending through enough Congressional districts as to make the cuts politically difficult.
Trump made increasing the size and strength of the military a top priority during the campaign. He is considering several proposals on escalating the fight against ISIS, which is likely to involve an increase in ground troops deployed around the Middle East. This too is likely to increase costs in the final budget.
$600 billion annually is not enough? Wouldn’t it be a lot cheaper — and more fun for The Donald — if Congress gave him $50 billion worth of reality-show-quality war toys to play with?
And not one penny will be for actual defense of anything that matters other than big business profits.
David please, nobody who has their head outside their own a-s is talking about defense.
Navies of this sort are strictly for offensive purposes in order to take the planned wars to the enemy.
luv from Canada.
My point exactly. What is your problem?
One good thing after another. Making America great again.
Our military does not need more spending dumped into its bottomless pit.
We spend more now in real dollars than we did when the Army and Navy and Air Force were twice this size. Those were not economy models either, with constant complaints of “gold plating.”
It goes past the boondoggles of programs like the F-35.
It is multiplying wars. Wars are very expensive, wars of any size, and endless war is a bottomless pit. Spain destroyed itself with endless war in the Low Countries, and it has been a theme ever since.
It is also multiplying overseas bases. They are expensive. We have near a thousand, in two thirds of the countries of the world, almost a thousand bases. That multiplies.
We are far past waste, well into insanity.
Spending is necessary to grow and expand wealth. And wealth is required to maintain a standard of living. For example, oil at over a hundred dollars a barrel was too exxpensive for the US to endure. Militaries are meant to solve those kind of problems.
Are you delusional? Our economy, infrastructure, and our safety net is in tatters and that is entirely due to the obscene amount of the budget is consumed by the Defense Budget.
No, I’m not delusional. The choice has been made to grow and keep a large military. I’m not suggesting that’s the morally correct thing to do.
I’m saying that your country probably can’t continue to prosper at current levels without the force of your military. In any case, nobody on either side is proposing any real change. Trump may have pretended in a sort of confusing way but he’s already shown that he had no commitment to another course.
All bets are on world domination and that requires an all powerful military.
Nobody’s betting on a reduction of the military and a shot at doing it by improving the internal and domestic situation.
And really, what chance has the US vs. the emerging world powers on the economic front? You have no idea what ‘tatters’ and ‘failing safety net’ and ‘collapsing infrastructure’ mean yet.
You don’t even have a president that can understand that Mexican labour at 5 bucks a day is necessary to keep your country viable. (both political parties always did understand)
Maybe you would like to rethink the military as a means of doing what you need to do to survive in comfort to which you’re accustomed..
I am afraid that we all are so prone to take one set of metrics and use them as one snd only relevant. Take cost of labor. Do you know that an automaker (will not name, as an acquaintace of mine works fot its Mexico plant) in Mexico hires East European engineers, at the cost that may be higher from what comparable skill is in US, and that even though the cost of labor is low, those cars are sold in US on the market price basis — that is, compared with the cars made in US.
Cars are compared on the basis of their features, whatever market will bear. The only difference is –the profit margin is higher when produced in Mexico. But that is not beneffiting consumer — and definitely not American worker. A Gerrman carmaker in Mexico can without problem bring German engineers and other high tech labor and this way keep peace with unions. They must hire some in Mexico, but they pay them much less.
The extra profit –not benefit to either consumer, the economy or public revenue — is the amount of wealth accumulating in fewer number of people, but they dispose of it as they see fit, and only small portion is reinvestment. Banking and sovereign lending attracts such weslth.
But what is already happening in the world — loans to countries are constantly reprogrammed, and as a result total amount owed is always higher. Greece being good but not only example. At that point no added value to economy accrues. Economies degrade, while all the immense capital floating around is merely rent seeking, not contributing to economic development. At some point music will stop playing, and the taxpayers around the world will be holding the bag.
Since it already happened before — it is hard to imagine working again. It has nothing to do with living too good. It is about making sure that capital is a working asset, not a feudal possesion granted to the recepient by the modern sovereign, the state. I am not blaming those that earn such massive profits. It would be unfair to expect them to have the knowledge or the energy to foresee the economic needs, potential inovations and their social impact. We cannot ask them to become central planners of global economies. It is not their fault — probably nobody’s. We have system tklted to benefit maximizing profits, and it has reached the point of undercutting the branch we all sit on — the profitability.
Globalizing production and profit, but localizing the losses — we have reached the end of feudal lordship style global economy. By returning to state-based bilateral dealing we can at least take out some anomalies that multilateral overlords have built into the system. By looking af ALL COSTS to one’s country — not just wage savings, it will be possible to asses REAL costs to the economy when considering the rules of the financial and economic order.
It depends what kind of spending. Some will have you go bankrupt. Others will increase wealth. There some laws governing this — and they are ased on knowing the relationship between profit snd profitability. The higher the profit margine the lower the profitability. Higher and higher profit does not translate into reinvestment into real economy. The less economic activity, the less purchasing power, more debt, more destruction of equity. Once the economy cannot support the standard of living other measures are credit and public funding. If one really has to do it –spend it wisely. Infrustructure is a no brainer. But I think military spending makes sense.
Our military has a real mileage on it –milesge on hardware and people. He will have obsolescent programs all over the globe where bases sre not needed. Some wars can be closed out, and neighboring countries asked to pitch in to invest in rebuilding and security. I hope Ttump has no neocon false pride, where not letting anyone in to share costs – means “leadership”. Adityionally, he will change gradually the skill sets for armed forces –hence special ops. And there is a concern with basic science gap between US and competitors, affectingvthe cyvle of new generations of military assets. None of these are trivial concerns. The first step is to at least address the issue of dpare psrts, so military does not have to chop old planes for them. Mileage of endless wars has caught up with the best military on planet.
One small country after another in regional conflicts to gain proxy states. Until another ambitious nation stands in the way.
Thank the dogs for nuclear weapons.
Flushing money down the toilet!
From an antiwar POV, yes.
From an economic POV, no not necessarily.
The very large majority of the American people sort of understand that without understanding it. Building a more powerful miliarty that can never be challenged is what they understand as good. That’s about the depth of their understanding.
One thing the US is really really good at.
The Pentagon budget is around $700 billion.
…..
The Pentagon’s own auditors
found they cannot account for 25 percent of their daily expenditures.
That means Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
the Pentagon loses around $86 million tax dollars an hour.
The Pentagon loses more of your tax dollar money before lunch each day
than Americans will see in their entire life times
That means the Pentagon loses enough of your tax dollars every day
to deliver every American free health care.
The military budget is actually a lot more than 7 billion, simply because many military functions fall under other agencies’ budgets. It’s well over a trillion.
a lot more than 700 billion, that is…
Atomic weapons fall under the Energy departments funding!
Between NASA and that crappy little rogue state in the middle east you could recoup BILLIONS. Neither produce anything of any real worth.
NASA doesn’t produce anything of any real worth?
Do you actually know what NASA is?
http://www. 21stcentech. com/money-spent-nasa-waste/
http://www .21stcentech.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/NASA-Spinning-Off-Since-1962.jpg
Looks like China is suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome too!
War with the US under Donald Trump is “not just a slogan” and becoming a “practical reality”, a senior Chinese military official has said.
The remarks were published on the People’s Liberation Army website, apparently in response to the aggressive rhetoric towards China from America’s new administration.
They communicated a view from inside the Central Military Commission, which has overall authority of China’s armed forces.
Quoted in the South China Morning Post, the official from the Commission’s Defence Mobilisation Department wrote: “A war ‘within the president’s term’ or ‘war breaking out tonight’ are not just slogans, they are becoming a practical reality.”
A few new fighter jets may be a necessity. I think Russia has a new fighter plane that could embarrass us . only our F22 and maybe the F35 could fight with the new Russian planes . all our older planes would be out classed . As far as war ships go , I no longer think they are practical.. To easy to destroy with one shot from the new missiles . Both China and Russia have some new weapons they would like to show us how well they work . Trump better plan on making friends with China too . Because China and Russia are pretty much together ever since we attack both of them and humiliated them in Yugoslavia 17 years ago . I think China are closer with Russia than we are with NATO .
Sorry eric but you’re just plain stupid. Listen and read more, voice opinions much less.
In light of recent troop movements, American saber rattling, and the relentless vilification of Russia and President Putin, my first thought on seeing this headline was, is the world beefing up for the final cataclysmic conflict of the age? Time will tell.
for what purpose? he needs to us any funds available to rebuild americas infrastructure.
Alright then chris, let’s think of it on a whole new level.
The premise of that is: The US cannnot continue to prosper as the leading capitalist country in the world without applying military pressure abroad.
Internal mechanisms and domestic politics can’t uphold your country’s high (relatively) standard of living. It’s very basic logic for you to grapple with. Take it as if it may or may not be true.
You see, the world needs to come to terms with the fact that somewhere between, for instance, China’s standard of living and the Scandinavian countries’ standard of living, is the common ground for all. Lacking that understanding means continuous wars.
Excepting that the wild card is MAD.
endless wars do not lead to prosperity for any but the elite.