BF2S Forums Why Defense Spending (and all other spending) Must Go Down for U.S.

eleven bravo wrote:

firefighters and cops still make more money than an unmarried e-1.  that 22k amount also includes the 2 promotions I got before redeploying.  fuck, that shit just made me a bitter jaded motherfucker.  I was hell for dip shit nco's who were trying to tell me what to do as I was i clearing hood.

JohnG@lt wrote:

lowing wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

In times of peace, most government contracts to the defense industry are indeed charity. That's why they have teams of lobbyists. It's why 30 or so F-22s were pushed into the stimulus bill last year, so congressmen could keep people employed in their own districts even though the military didn't want the aircraft.

You are straying. ALL of the backroom deals and cut throat payoffs is a different matter. that has nothing to do with the fact that govt. does not create jobs and that the govt. hiring a contractor is not wealth redistribution.

Ok, so we're halfway there now. You agree that the government can't create jobs. One down.

Now, I know you have your hand in the cookie jar personally so this one kind of stings but government contracting is indeed wealth redistribution. They are taking money from some and rewarding others. Granted, they do get something in return most of the time but it is at a vastly inflated price comparative to what the people receiving the contract would get on the open market. Fair wage laws and other stupidity mandates this.

-----

Let's pretend that a highway is privately owned instead of federally owned. Mr Galt owns this highway and understands that it is in his best interest to maintain this highway to the best of his abilities. This prevents lawsuits from motorists who may charge him with negligence if he gets into an accident and it also encourages people to use his road instead of his competitors. It is, of course, a toll road. He's not running a charity.

Now, because Mr Galt is diligent about maintaining his highway but is also beholden to his shareholders who seek maximum profit, he is forced to balance cost and quality when dealing with contractors who wish to work on his highway. He might take bids or he might seek out the best contracting company in the country/world to maintain his road. The decision is his. This is the free market approach.

Compare this to the government approach which is forced to accept the lowest bid, even if there are no competing bids. Fair wage laws that I mentioned earlier push the price of the bids into the stratosphere. Politics also comes into play as politicians line up to force the contracts into their own district at the expense of others that may or may not do a better job. This is counteracted by lobbying groups trying to do the same thing as the politicians, with other politicians. Quality and price don't even factor into the equation because they've been artificially bumped out.


-----

I'll take Mr Galt's approach every single time because it's efficient, is not wasteful and it actually creates jobs instead of pulling them from elsewhere in the economy. The defense industry should not be paid up front for it's R&D. It needs to create a product that the military finds useful and then profit off of it in that way. The bottomless pit of money that goes into canceled R&D projects is atrocious all because some Pentagon asshat had a dream for an unneeded product. Let him go into private industry, design it, and then come back to sell it. If he can't sell it, it's his own problem and his own loss. He failed to gauge the market correctly.

Now, should we privatize the military? Absolutely not. Does it need to be scaled back immensely? Yes. The turnover in equipment within our military comes at a snails pace precisely because it is so large and cumbersome. We can't keep up with changes in technology because of the sheer cost of replacing gear. Hell, we're using 50 year old assault rifles, 60 year old packs etc.

eleven bravo wrote:

i know I had to have at least 300 bucks ready to buy gear and pogie bait right before a long field problem.  at the time I was a pfc making 445 every two weeks

DBBrinson1 wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

i know I had to have at least 300 bucks ready to buy gear and pogie bait right before a long field problem.  at the time I was a pfc making 445 every two weeks

heh... an extra 100 bucks a month would have helped out.  Granted you wouldn't run out and by that ferrari, but still.  $100 isn't chump change to me.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-05-21 12:24:38)

11 Bravo wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

11 Bravo wrote:

i agree.  bring back the draft.

Make conscripts into pogs lel

i think turq should be drafted.  would do him some good.  force him to live with dark people lels.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

The government creates jobs? Why are you saying it can't... I'm confused on that part..

The Government can not actually produce profit. Ok say you take a private sector job as a lets say Landscaper, that landscaper will be paid on the front end doing there job of mowing and they'll collect up the grass and leaves. Then they'll make mulch pits and sell the mulch off later, either by using it on an other job or just selling it. Now you make a government Landscaper and they'll just do the job and take the money for it, but they will never make the backend money.

Like the garbage/recycling people, they could actually produce money by charging for the recycling and probably enough to suppliment the cost. But instead they just pick and spend.

So government can create jobs, but it can't generate any money from the jobs it does create. Oh the government can only consume, it doesn't produce anything.

Oh and the military pay when you factor in all the free shit, isn't 22k a year. It's really around 50k a year, just saying.

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

fuck that I made 22 thousand dollars for the year I was in iraq.  raise the pay.

Man, that is complete fucking bullshit. Paying soldiers in a warzone that much is absolutely pitiful. I get payed more than that and all I do is military training and a Uni degree.

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

Man, that is complete fucking bullshit. Paying soldiers in a warzone that much is absolutely pitiful. I get payed more than that and all I do is military training and a Uni degree.

He was the lowest rank in the military that is reserved for soldiers that fucked up or who just entered the service...

haha true. but I can tell you that the lowest ranked person (non-trainee) in the RAAF makes $52,910 while not at war/peacekeeping. That goes up if they are in a dangerous environment

just seems like eleven got ripped off

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

haha true. but I can tell you that the lowest ranked person (non-trainee) in the RAAF makes $52,910 while not at war/peacekeeping. That goes up if they are in a dangerous environment

just seems like eleven got ripped off

Do you have 1.5 million people on active duty and another 1.5 million in the reserves? Costs a lot of money to pay people.

Yeah, we also don't have a 14 trillion dollar GDP though. I guess thats one advantage of a smaller army though, you can be more selective and can offer more money to attract people.

JohnG@lt wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

i know I had to have at least 300 bucks ready to buy gear and pogie bait right before a long field problem.  at the time I was a pfc making 445 every two weeks

heh... an extra 100 bucks a month would have helped out.  Granted you wouldn't run out and by that ferrari, but still.  $100 isn't chump change to me.

It would've just been spent at the local titty bars. I knew exactly one guy that saved money while I was in. He ended up walking out of the Army with $50k in his bank account. He never spent a penny except once a month when he would splurge on a pizza. But, his goal in life was to work in a supermarket while riding his bike to work so he was quite strange anyway.

It's a matter of control anyway. If you keep wages low, the threat of an Article 15 and loss of pay is significant. This is why they kick out anyone with a six figure bank account. It makes them insubordinate etc. Keep em poor and they have less options. A family can't afford to leave the service because it doesn't have a nest egg built up. This is why retention rates are so high for married soldiers and why they encourage soldiers to get married.