In principle, yes, but austerity right now is a horrible idea, and even defense contractors consume, so we should be careful about any form of austerity and ensure that, if we are going to slash spending on the military, that the funds are appropriately allocated to other venues. 'Weaponized Keynesianism," historically, has provided a significant boon to the economy, which is why conservatives love it so much.
In principle, yes, but austerity right now is a horrible idea, and even defense contractors consume, so we should be careful about any form of austerity and ensure that, if we are going to slash spending on the military, that the funds are appropriately allocated to other venues. 'Weaponized Keynesianism," historically, has provided a significant boon to the economy, which is why conservatives love it so much. - Voter Comments
@ararmer1919: I don't think it's a "misinformed belief" to feel that the military budget is bloated when the US spends more than the next 10 largest countries combined (http://www.Nbcnews.Com/storyline/military-spending-cuts/u-s-military-spending-dwarfs-rest-world-n37461), so throwing around ad hominem attacks, as you did, without facts isn't exactly making you out to look like an intellectual.
Again, there's a bit of nuance to this, which I tried to add with the additional option, but no one is taking the bait. If only DDO allowed me to teach an economics class.....Then again, conservatives would flock elsewhere, no longer able to market their BS.
Progressivedem22 your absolutely right. We do spend more on our military then the next 9 nations combined. This was something I never denied nor is it the misinformation I spoke of. This was no as hominem. This fact is something that people bring up every time, as it is usually thier only form of argument. So, tell me, WHY is this a bad thing? So what if we spend more then then all of them? When you can make an argument for this case (I'll even accept a debate over this) then I will tell you why it is not over bloated.
Why are you asking me to make an argument when you haven't made yours? I'd love to know which misinformation you were speaking of, because you yourself admit to this figure, and I'm sure you'd also admit that the military budget increased substantially after Bush took us into two wars. Historically, the military budget has been much lower. Eisenhower, a Republican actually, commented -- I think, quite rightly -- that any dollar spent on a weapons system is a dollar we're not spending feeding people, which is fundamentally immoral. The reason the budget is so high, honestly, is not to protect ourselves: we already spend much, much more than any other industrialized nation. It's because we feel as though the U.S. has to be the policeman of the world, which gave way to a sense of preemeptive warfare in the 21st century that is practically unprecedented as a matter of scale, though not completely unforeseen (take intervention in Iran in 53', for instance). But I think this logic ultimately falls, because if we are to be the policemen of the world, we would literally need to invade almost every single Middle Eastern country, and I don't think conservatives would even support that: many opposed intervention in Syria, even. I say this as somehow who believes that the government needs to run deficits during bad times and cut back during good times: we cannot afford to be the policemen of the world if we ever want to have a balanced budget.