To: TimF who wrote (175453 ) 9/27/2003 1:44:14 PM From: tejek Read Replies (1) | Respond to "What standard due you use too determine too high or not too high?" I know that you consider the current level too high. I'm asking what criteria you use to determine what is too high and what is not too high. I can not tell you how much I am tired of hearing that "the most important part of our gov't" is military spending/protecting its citizens. Through 4 years of undergrad with a dual major in pol sci. and bus., and 2 years of a grad. program as well as my adult years in LA, and I never once heard that statement until I came to this thread. I realize that its central to the thesis of conservative ideology but it was not the central theme for the founding of this nation. True, most people want meat or veggies on their sandwich, maybe both and maybe some spread. But without the bread you don't have the sandwich. That isn't an argument against including the meat. One fourth of our revenues go to defense spending at a time when we have no real sovereign enemy. Its disgusting! That percentage is lower then the level at almost any point in the last 60 years. Also a better measure of how well we can afford defense spending is as a percentage of GDP. By that measure its less then half of the level that existed for much of the cold war. Basically we cut the burden of what we spend on defense in half. You might argue that we should have cut out perhaps 2/3rds instead but I don't see how only cutting 1/2 of the burden makes it disgusting. Tim, Bush has asked for $87 billion this year and Cheney said last week that its very likely they'll be back in for roughly $90 billion in the first half of next year. Rummy has asked that approval of the $87 billion be passed by Congress by next Tuesday. I suspect that's because the initial outlay of $80 billion is nearly gone. Its not even a full year yet. Three hundred billion looks very doable and $400 billion very possible
