Within the past week, President Obama announced his plans for which domestic programs would see a budget cut; the New York Times reports air-traffic control, farm subsidies, education, nutrition and national parks will be among the many domestic programs suffering from budget cuts for the 201o fiscal year. While these domestic needs are sparingly let go, President Obama will proceed with expanding troops in Afghanistan and keeping this pestering war in tact.
Don't get me wrong, Obama's platform from day one was eliminate the war in Iraq and his stance on Afghanistan is as demonstrated. But is cutting funding for domestic programs (unrelated to national security) really the best idea? No. The government hands the military billions upon billions of dollars every year to spend on weapons development and secret projects civilians are to be unaware of. At such a crucial time financially for everyone effected by the recession, is maintaining these militant side-projects the right thing to do? Again, no.
The way to fix the deficit, or at least get the ball rollin' would be to cut back on military spending AND domestic spending. Our government needs to re-prioritize and then redistribute the money. Finally putting an end to loop-holes, harsher punishments for the Wall Street thief and making sure the money is actually spent the right way. All of these will indefinitely help in the short run. As far as the long run is concerned, education is key.
The government has an undeniable and tremendous responsibility in regards to educating the future of the nation. By giving more money to education programs and having stricter regulations and standards for our children, the government will be producing efficient leaders for tomorrow. Fixing your mistakes now and teaching the youth from them will be a major component for preventing future recessions and financial irresponsibility. Feed, cloth, educate, medicate and house the children of today for the betterment of tomorrow.
President Obama has, once again, shed light upon the timeless debate of Guns vs. Butter. And Butter has idealistically triumphed Guns. This is a call to action for a modern-day Robin Hood! Mr. Obama, are you up for the challenge?
A successful nation requires an advanced military with top of the line weapons. Indeed the virility and strength of a nation can be compared to the technological advancement of its weapon systems. Throughout history the most powerful empires and nations have spent large quantities of money on maintaining a powerful military force (ancient Egypt, Rome, Pre WW2-Germany).
ReplyDeleteThe money spent on the military allows for a civilian infrastructure to be maintained. Pre WW2 Germany's economy was in shables, a depression that makes the America's great depression look like nothing. Upon taking power Hitler devoted great sums of money to rebuilding the German army which subsequently led to Germany developing one of the most prosperous economies during that time period (better than the United States). Within two years of America's involvement in WW2 the United State's economy and war machine was at peak capacity employing great numbers of americans. The military provides MILLIONS of jobs to the american economy! The soldiers are paid a wage to defend the country, the weapon manufacturers are awarded contracts, independent designers compete for government funding in order to create new weapon systems, civilian contractors are brought in to build bases and maintain equipment. If you cut military spending you jeapordize the not only the security of the nation but take away jobs from economy. How is the economy best served by taking away already existing jobs?
Additionaly, improvements in military technology often lead to great advances in civilian technology which leads to the creation of more jobs (i.e. microwave, fiber optics, metallurgy, chemistry, physics, communications, cell phones, satellites, medicine, energy, etc, etc, etc.) More technology is developed in the course of war than is developed during peace time, necessity being the mother of invention. A cut in military spending may very limit the technological advancment of the world.
You state that we should reform military spending, yet you have made no comments on reforming the very system that got us into this economic disaster; the banks. Cutting military spending will have little impact on the current economic situation. The three beats of prosperity, recession, and depression are like an endless waltz that any economy must endure to be healthy. In order to get the ball rolling a reform is required in the banking system of America. Unchecked spending and dangerous loan practices have gotten America into this depression.
In order to cloth, educate, and medicate the children of today for the betterment of tomorrow requires a military force willing to kill for those ideals. Nobody won a war by dying for his/her country, you have to ensure the other person dies for their country. The military exists so that you can read/write/live/prosper and in order to win you need to have the technological edge, because with technology you turn one man into an army and army into legion.
You say that butter is victorious over guns, yet every nation and economy on the planet disagrees with this ideology by putting its military spending ahead of all other priorities. How is butter victorious?
Even in the President's State of the Union address he admits that government spending in 2011 will be frozen but the budgets of the Armed Forces will not be affected. Guns > Butter.
ReplyDelete