Non-defense spending

 Six charts illustrating what is happening to non-defense spending/safety net. 6 Charts Highlight Trends Driven by Growing Nondefense Spending (dailysignal.com)

The growth of the federal budget and the debt has been driven by an unsustainable growth in nondefense spending.

These charts illustrate how we got here and the long-term consequences to our nation’s financial health.

Obama and the military

Obama vetoed the NDAA. He stabbed our military in the back and sunk us at a very dangerous time—right on the heels of his giving the store to Iran to build nuclear weapons. Such bills had been vetoed by only four past presidents according to WSJ—in 1978, 1988, 1995 and 2007. In each case, the president objected to an actual provision in the bill, and each time Congress’s Armed Services committees were able to find a compromise that earned the presidential signature. Obama isn't about bi-partisanship or compromise.

In vetoing this legislation, President Obama has made history, but for all the wrong reasons. He has become the first commander in chief willing to sacrifice national security by vetoing a bill that authorizes pay, benefits and training for U.S. troops, simply because he seeks leverage to pursue his domestic political agenda.

The president didn’t veto the bill because of any of its policies, which make some of the most significant reforms to the Pentagon in more than 30 years, while giving troops the vital capabilities necessary to combat today’s mounting threats. (Wall St. Journal)

Defense is part of discretionary spending. It’s 16% of the $3.8 trillion compared to the 60% (mandated) spending on Medicare, Medicaid, S0cial Security, unemployment.

The Defense budget—far less than social services

Just when I found the defense percentage of the budget chart, I can't find the liberal web page (Daily Kos, I think)  that totally distorted it. Well, it's between 17-22% of the budget depending on what you count as defense (some include pensions, VA, etc.) Most of the rest is social services like Medicare, Medicaid, WIC, EITC, SNAP, Social Security, Housing, agriculture (nutrition support), 128 programs to move money from citizen A to resident B and of course, interest on the debt. Never trust a liberal chart on the economy; they take our taxes and then say it's never enough.

Hmm.  Looky there.  Federal pensions are more than health care.  Who knew?

Where does the money go?

In 2010, the federal government spent 61% of its finances on housing and community services, welfare and social services, recreation and culture, health, education, retirement benefits, disability benefits and unemployment benefits. This amounts to 2,124 billion dollars or $19,316/household. "Government Current Expenditures by Function, Table 3.16." U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. Sept. 14, 2011.

http://www.justfacts.com/socialspending.basics.asp

Is Ron Paul a tool of the left?

From Breitbart TV, Trevor Loudon.

"Ron Paul’s libertarian suspicion of big government defense spending, has been deliberately fostered and encouraged by the most anti libertarian elements in the land – the US hard left.

Ron Paul, and many libertarians think they can work with the left to achieve libertarian ends.

The hard bitten Leninists and disciplined Marxists of the left know they can use naive libertarians to achieve their ends – particularly to gut America’s defenses to the benefit of their foreign masters.

In short, the US left is using Ron Paul and other libertarians, to do what their armies and intelligence services have long dreamed of – destroying America’s military superiority, and with it, US national sovereignty.

By promoting the left’s defense policies, Ron Paul, a man of patriotism beyond question, could be unknowingly betraying his own country to its enemies."

Guns and Butter

This chart always amazes me--particularly reflecting on the outrage during the Bush years about the paltry spending on social programs. One of the reasons Bush had so much tax money to direct to two wars and all sorts of little social wars at home was his tax cuts. It's unfortunate that he didn't decrease government spending, but like the rest of us, it's easy to spend when the wallet is fat. Obama is doing just the opposite, and business investment has been dropping and unemployment rising since the summer of 2008 when he became the heir and parent. Capitalists aren't stupid--they can go elsewhere to invest. He's raising taxes and creating more social wars at home as well as increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan. But instead of corraling terrorists, he plans to loose and lose them in Europe and America--and why not--they certainly aren't wanted back home where they are tainted!

He will take the credit and shift the blame

The recovery funds really aren't out the door yet, not even the extended unemployment benefits or the $250 boost; certainly not that tax cut for 95% of the people. That first sidewalk hasn't been poured, and no spreading around of trickle sideways dollars has begun so people can buy cars or go out to eat to help the salesmen and busboys. And yet the media have been mildly optimistic recently--have you noticed? Unemployment, which shot up as soon as it was known in the summer that Obama would be the Democratic candidate and most likely the President, has started to level off. The stock market is making a weak recovery--at least that's what our retirement accounts show. This is pure and simple because of the efforts of the American people and their backing off from fear--fear of a collapse, fear of Obama, fear of the steamroller roaring down at us.

But Obamaides will claim victory if it continues even though no ARRA programs have begun to work, and they will blame Bush if they fail. Heads he wins; tails he wins. But he really wins if we let him destroy our economy in the process of "saving" us. All industrialized nations are struggling more than the U.S., have slower growth, higher taxes, more stagnant work force--and why not? Their workers get more generous time off before they really need to look for work. And it's self-fulfilling. Take a vacation; fix the car; read some good books; build a web page, hike in the mountains. Then maybe after 18 months of 90% salary replacement you can dust off the resume. What's the hurry? It's just the economy--it will be there when you get back.

There's only one way to jump start and fuel the economy--reduce taxes and reduce government spending. It works every time. It's just hard to get re-elected if you don't bring home the pork if a Republican, and hard to get reelected if you don't punish the rich if you are a Democrat. It even partially works if you just reduce taxes the way George Bush did--but he threw money at every domestic program he could think of, particularly education--President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation--instead of dialing back. Democrats who supported him on the war screamed bloody murder about the tax cuts--said it was criminal--but he brought in more money than they ever did--and he spent it too. President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal anti-poverty programs, but President Me-Too Obama has already in­creased this spending by 20 percent. He won't be bringing in more tax money the way Bush did and will have to raise taxes. Social spending was out of control during the Bush years. That's another big lie the Democrats love to tell--that Republicans are stingy on DoE, USDA, HHS, HUD. Oh, that it were true, we'd be so much better off with a smaller federal government.

The BushBamBudgets
WaPo graphic
Bush 8 years includes 2 wars

4609

Defense spending

A chart in the WSJ today showed that defense spending is at 4% of the GDP. It was above 5% in 1990 according to OMB, then went down to 3% 1999-2001, then rose to 4% 2004-2007 (I'm reading the chart; didn't see the numbers in the article). In Bush's budget predictions it should go up--I'm not sure if that is in spending, or because revenues will be down when the Democrats increase taxes. During the Korean War defense spending was 14% of GDP, and 9.5% during the VietNam War, and 6% during the Reagan years as noted in Bret Stephens article on Declinism. He notes that within a few years of the Reagan military build-up the Soviet Union collapsed. Europe and Japan with virtually no military costs during the same time period entered a period of economic stagnation.

Hand wringing over how Europeans and Asians see us is a politicians' hunt for fools gold, he says. Watch for a new book by Fred Kaplan, another author getting paid for predicting America's decline. They've been quite popular during the Bush administration and will probably drop off if a Democrat is elected, even if nothing changes globally. These declinism books are a bit like the anti-war movies these days. Do they sell--I mean to anyone but public libraries, who love this stuff.

4256

DREAM Act is our nightmare

Welcome to Amnesty via the Defense bill. When thinking, tax-paying Americans defeated the Bush administration, the RINOS, and the Democratic left on Amnesty, they just circled the wagons and came up with another plan--The DREAM ACT, "Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act of 2007".

If this is successfully attached to a Department of Defense authorization bill (HR 1585) illegal aliens will receive amnesty and be able to receive in-state tuition, with only claiming to be here before they turned 16. Whoopee do. And no one who entered the country illegally, who violated our laws in the first place, would ever think of lying, would they?

And the wigged out Kos calls Tom Tancredo crazy for threating to call the ICE on any illegal paraded by the Dems for the sympathy vote at the press conference? Call the authorities empowered by law to stop it? I'd call that brilliant. If you can't keep the illegals out of these phony rituals "for the children" that the Dems seem to love, where are they not welcome?

Update: I have contacted my Senators. Have you contacted yours? No matter how they try to sneak this in, the American people do not want amnesty for illegals. They will self-select to go home to their own country and families, to build up their own nation and obey their own laws, when opportunities for them here are closed down.