If defense takes up 16% of this years budget then by definition non defense takes up 84%.
Tim,
The budget people break it out the way I presented it. They refer to the items that you call non defense as medicaid, medicare, SS and net interest.
"Acquisition spending is down by 60 percent between 1987
and 1995. Research and development budgets will fall 40 percent from 1987 through 1999, and what is left focuses mainly on modifications and upgrades of existing
systems rather than on developing new ones. The obvious consequence of slowed modernization is a military with aging equipment. By the year 2010, the average age
of tanks in the U.S. military will be 21 years; of utility helicopters, nearly 30 years; of navy fighter aircraft, 15 years; of attack submarines and surface ships, 16 years; of
air force fighter-attack aircraft, 20 years; and of air force bombers and transport planes, 35 years."
First, Clinton has made it clear that we can not pick up the tab all the time playing police man to the world. Secondly, who are we going to use all this equipment against..short of an invasion by Mars, the equipment will be used only in training exercises. Thirdly, the military is notorious for overpaying things....like the lug nut that cost $125 a piece. Finally they already get $293 billion a year....my God that has got to be bigger than the national budget for most of the countries in the world.
One final comment and this is getting somewhat personal but Republicans are noted for being fiscally conservative until it comes to the military. I just don't get it because that's where the biggest waste has been since WWII.
ted |
