Skip to main content

"War is a terrible waste of precious resources." Jim Rogers, native Alabamian, and legendary investor and philanthropist.

"This article shines a light on the uncomfortable truth of our love for war and how patriotic propaganda is used to sell it our citizens." Miamizsun - money manger extraordinaire, budding philanthropic protege.

America's War Economy.

Pentagon can't find $2.3 trillion, wasting trillions on 'national defense'

By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
Last update: 7:27 p.m. EDT Aug. 18, 2008

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- Yes, America's economy is a war economy. Not a "manufacturing" economy. Not an "agricultural" economy. Nor a "service" economy. Not even a "consumer" economy.
Seriously, I looked into your eyes, America, saw deep into your soul. So let's get honest and officially call it "America's Outrageous War Economy." Admit it: we secretly love our war economy. And that's the answer to Jim Grant's thought-provoking question last month in the Wall Street Journal -- "Why No Outrage?"

There really is only one answer: Deep inside we love war. We want war. Need it. Relish it. Thrive on war. War is in our genes, deep in our DNA. War excites our economic brain. War drives our entrepreneurial spirit. War thrills the American soul. Oh just admit it, we have a love affair with war. We love "America's Outrageous War Economy."

* Why else are Americans so eager and willing to surrender 54% of their tax dollars to a war machine, which consumes 47% of the world's total military budgets?

* Why are there more civilian mercenaries working for no-bid private war contractors than the total number of enlisted military in Iraq (180,000 to 160,000), at an added cost to taxpayers in excess of $200 billion and climbing daily?

* Why do we shake our collective heads "yes" when our commander-in-chief proudly tells us he is a "war president;" and his party's presidential candidate chants "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran," as if "war" is a celebrity hit song?

* Why do our spineless Democrats let an incompetent, blundering executive branch hide hundreds of billions of war costs in sneaky "supplemental appropriations" that are more crooked than Enron's off-balance-sheet deals?

* Why have Washington's 537 elected leaders turned the governance of the American economy over to 42,000 greedy self-interest lobbyists?

* And why earlier this year did our "support-our-troops" "war president" resist a new GI Bill because, as he said, his military might quit and go to college rather than re-enlist in his war; now we continue paying the Pentagon's warriors huge $100,000-plus bonuses to re-up so they can keep expanding "America's Outrageous War Economy?" Why? Because we secretly love war!

We've lost our moral compass: The contrast between today's leaders and the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence in 1776 shocks our conscience. Today war greed trumps morals. During the Revolutionary War our leaders risked their lives and fortunes; many lost both.
Today it's the opposite: Too often our leaders' main goal is not public service but a ticket to building a personal fortune in the new "America's Outrageous War Economy," often by simply becoming a high-priced lobbyist.
Ultimately, the price of our greed may be the fulfillment of Kevin Phillips' warning in "Wealth and Democracy:" "Most great nations, at the peak of their economic power, become arrogant and wage great world wars at great cost, wasting vast resources, taking on huge debt, and ultimately burning themselves out."

'National defense' a propaganda slogan selling a war economy?
But wait, you ask: Isn't our $1.4 trillion war budget essential for "national defense" and "homeland security?" Don't we have to protect ourselves?
Sorry folks, but our leaders have degraded those honored principles to advertising slogans. They're little more than flag-waving excuses used by neocon war hawks to disguise the buildup of private fortunes in "America's Outrageous War Economy."
America may be a ticking time bomb, but we are threatened more by enemies within than external terrorists, by ideological fanatics on the left and the right. Most of all, we are under attack by our elected leaders who are motivated more by pure greed than ideology. They terrorize us, brainwashing us into passively letting them steal our money to finance "America's Outrageous War Economy," the ultimate "black hole" of corruption and trickle-up economics.
You think I'm kidding? I'm maybe too harsh? Sorry but others are far more brutal. Listen to the ideologies and realities eating at America's soul.
================================================================================ "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer - German philosopher (1788 - 1860)
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by ahanback:
Do you think we'll ever get out of this mess our current leadership has put us in?


Current leadership?

This has been going on for decades. While it is true that the debt, deficit and unfunded liability has skyrocketed under the Bush Jr. admin, we have to give credit(no pun intended)to every president and congress for the last 50 years at least.

The worst screwing in the history of the planet, and the troubling part is that we are teaching our children how to hold their ankles as well and endure the generational rape while singing the anthem or reciting the pledge. Our lineage is severely screwed, beyond the comprehension of most.

The question becomes: What are we going to do about it?

Does anyone have any freaking idea how much a trillion is?

How long it would take you to count to trillion?

At one number per second, it would take you 11, 570,000 days, or about 31709 years.

regards, miamizsun
Amen, Miamizsun!

"I think there's a tendency in the part of policy makers — and probably a tendency in the part of many Americans — to think that the problems we face are problems that are out there somewhere beyond our borders, and that if we can fix those problems, then we'll be able to continue the American way of life as it has long existed. I think it's fundamentally wrong. Our major problems are here at home."
---Andrew Bacevich

I saw an interview Friday night on PBS's Bill Moyers Journal with Dr. Bacevich, Professor of International Relations and History at Boston University an author of "THE LIMITS OF POWER: THE END OF AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM.

Dr. Bacevich's book covers a lot of the same ground as your postand I look forward to reading it soon.

Here's a link to the interview with Moyers:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/watch.html
Ok,, lets look at some of the diatribe and decode the hyperbole.

“America's economy is a war economy. Not a "manufacturing" economy”

Does this look like a war economy or a manufacturing economy?

Leading Sector for US Exports and Investment 2007
• Medical Equipment - Leading Sector #1
• Pollution Control and Water Resources - Leading Sector #2
• Outbound Tourism to the United States - Leading Sector #3
• Safety and Security – Leading Sector #4
• Aircraft Parts –Leading Sector #5
• Franchising – Leading Sector #6
• Computer Software – Leading Sector #7
• Telecommunications Services – Leading Sector #8
• E-Commerce – Leading Sector #9
• Electric Power Systems – Leading Sector #10
• Telecom Equipment – Leading Sector #11
• Agricultural Sectors
• Agricultural Sector – Seafood
http://www.buyusa.gov/spain/en/43.html#_section1
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Why are there more civilian mercenaries working for no-bid private war contractors than the total number of enlisted military in Iraq (180,000 to 160,000),”

The number of contract personnel include messhall workers, truck drivers, construction personnel, Triple Canopy security guards (cheaper to hire for a short time, than detail soldiers from more important duties) garbage collectors, etc. Blackwater is decreasing its role as civilian guards.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Why have Washington's 537 elected leaders turned the governance of the American economy over to 42,000 greedy self-interest lobbyists”

Most of the lobbyists have nothing to do with defense. If the Government insists on passing laws that affect every aspect of our lives and business, expect groups to fight back under the right of petition. That said, I have little use for lobbyists, myself.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“And why earlier this year did our "support-our-troops" "war president" resist a new GI Bill because, as he said, his military might quit and go to college rather than re-enlist in his war; now we continue paying the Pentagon's warriors huge $100,000-plus bonuses to re-up so they can keep expanding "America's Outrageous War Economy?"

The highest regular re-enlistment bonus is for a Patriot Missile operator (14T) for six years at $12,000. For the $100,000 bonus, you must be Special Forces, speak near perfect arab and re-enlist for six years.


Now, a bit different than the posted rant, isn't it.
Last edited by Howard Roark
miamizun,

Yes, the budget is spiraling out of sight. As I posted elsewhere, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan account for about 19 percent of the $481 billion deficit. Congress and the President both share in the guilt of overspending.

As to the unfunded deficits -- they are mainly social security and medicare, which are paid out of current receipts from withholding. That has been the rule since the beginning of the programs, which, I assure you, date to well before 2001.

Unfunded means that there are no funds set aside to pay any of the accounts in the future. However, to achieve the astronomical amounts reported as unfunded, the unemployment rate of the US would have to be 100 percent, with no commerce or collecting of any taxes. If that were the case, unfunded deficits would be the least of our worries.

I've posted a method of achieving Social Security funding, while keeping it in the Government, about six times -- scored and agreed upon by OMB and the Congressional Budget Office -- however, no one in Congress or successive administrations will do anything.

Jose Pinera achieved the same results by a slow privatizing of the Chilean social security system about 29 years ago. Annuitants receive well above the two percent return US annuitants receive for theirs.

Don’t go believing your own propaganda, else you cloud your judgment.
quote:
For 2007, the budget rose to US$439.3 billion.[1] This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance and production (~$9.3 billion, which is in the Department of Energy budget), Veterans Affairs (~$33.2 billion) or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (which are largely funded through extra-budgetary supplements, ~$170 billion in 2007).[2] Conversely, the military budget does allocate money for dual-use items, such as the development of infrastructure surrounding U.S. military bases. Altogether, military-related expenses totaled approximately $626.1 billion.[3]


From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...of_the_United_States

OK guys, show me the new math here. Where are the 2.3 trillion dollars? War time economy? Last time I looked the new car lots had an over supply of new vehicles, so I don't think the assembly lines have been converted to tanks and bombers. Anyone here use a ration card to buy fuel or a piece of meat? I don't think so! Yes, the US is spending more now, based on GDP, than the 90's. But there also was this event called 911 that everyone seems to have forgotten. We also have a bigger percentage of functioning armored vehicles and aircraft because there is no need to cannibalize some equipment to keep other vehicles operating.

The United States spends 3.7% of its GDP on its military, more than France's 2.6% and less than Saudi Arabia's 10%.[9] This is historically low for the United States since it peaked in 1944 at 37.8% of GDP (it reached the lowest point of 3.0% in 1999-2001). Even during the peak of the Vietnam War the percentage reached a high of 9.4% in 1968.[10]

quote:
There really is only one answer: Deep inside we love war. We want war. Need it. Relish it. Thrive on war. War is in our genes, deep in our DNA. War excites our economic brain. War drives our entrepreneurial spirit. War thrills the American soul. Oh just admit it, we have a love affair with war. We love "America's Outrageous War Economy."


Really, If anyone believes this, tell me why our country gives foreign aid to the starving and the afflicted. If we are so evil, wouldn't be simpler to conquer malnourished and sickly people and add to our "empire"? People, get your heads out of your rectums and go read the history of the 20'th Century!
I'm glad you guys enjoyed the post by the obviously p1ssed and motivated Mr. Farrell. He and MG Smedley Butler and many others recognize militarized corporatism when they see it. Here's a post by George Don a fellow capitalist that says it all pretty nicely too. Enjoy.

GD says:

Our freedom requires the strongest of defenses, and thank God for the US Soldier - certainly the most professional and moral in the world.

However, we should ask if our current definition of "Defense" has caused a departure from the US charter as Thomas Jefferson coined it – “Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none." ?

American has obviously not followed that path.

Instead, influenced by the Financiers and debt-driven fiat-currency systems of Central Europe, our concept of defense (and hence war), has morphed over the last 200 years.

So, today, are we in love with War, is it for our "defense", or is there some other gain to be had? Can we afford it?

As Bastiat observed in the 1850's, while "breaking a shopkeepers window" (War), may provide economic benefit for the window glazer, it ultimately takes more money from the shopkeeper and his customers, and deprives value from both.

Financing War is certainly profitable for those financing it!

And on a grander scale, the following true statements perhaps mesh a subtler motivation:

1) $USD currency is a fiat currency.
2) Flipping the concept of "savings" upside down - for almost 100 years, each $USD dollar is created as a credit debt FIRST, and not a representation of savings.
3) Therefore, NO DEBT = NO MONEY in the $USD. That is, if NO DEBT, the $USD Dollar dies as a currency.
4) Nothing creates public debt faster than War, (although Entitlements to the public are close).

Politicians want reelection, for their own egos and livelihood. Banks and financiers want debt, whether public or private. In the current environment, nobody wants to see the $USD collapse from lack of credit debt.

A dangerous combination unfortunately.

Certainly "patriotism", and "public safety", when real, can be considered as virtuous rationale for war(s).

Americans should NOT however, place excessive trust that either politicians or financiers can "put the brakes on" the debt of War. This is particularly true when "patriotism" and "safety" might be manipulated for a “bumper-sticker” public – a public whose credit debt now extends to their great grandchildren.

Can it be, that whether for war or entitlements, Thomas Jefferson's warnings regarding public debt and private control of US currency went unheeded?:

“I place economy among the first and most important republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared”, and

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them , will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Unless the American public recognizes the consequences of the debt they have allowed, through wars and entitlements, we risk a continuing growth in serfdom and 2nd-world status of our own creation.
You know as well as I do that governments, especially ours historically have dropped the gold standard and disconnected it from our dollar. It is no secret this is/was done to allow our government to manipulate money, printing truckloads in large part to fund our wars.

Our current course of spending can not be sustained. I think Farrell's point is this:





In other words,

* US military spending accounts for 48 percent, or almost half, of the world’s total military spending
* US military spending is more than the next 46 highest spending countries in the world combined
* US military spending is 5.8 times more than China, 10.2 times more than Russia, and 98.6 times more than Iran.
* US military spending is almost 55 times the spending on the six “rogue” states (Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria) whose spending amounts to around $13 billion, maximum. (Tabulated data does not include four of the six, as the data only lists nations that have spent over 1 billion in the year, so their budget is assumed to be $1 billion each)
* US spending is more than the combined spending of the next 45 countries.
* The United States and its strongest allies (the NATO countries, Japan, South Korea and Australia) spend $1.1 trillion on their militaries combined, representing 72 percent of the world’s total.
* The six potential “enemies,” Russia, and China together account for about $205 billion or 29% of the US military budget.

Why does the US number seem so high when the budget announced $517.9 for the Department of Defense?

Unfortunately, the budget numbers can be a bit confusing. For example, the Fiscal Year budget requests for US military spending do not include combat figures (which are supplemental requests that Congress approves separately). The budget for nuclear weapons falls under the Department of Energy, and for the 2009 request, was about $29 billion.

The cost of war (Iraq and Afghanistan) is estimated to be about $170 billion for the 2009 spending alone. Christopher Hellman and Travis Sharp also discuss the US fiscal year 2009 Pentagon spending request and note that “Congress has already approved nearly $700 billion in supplemental funding for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and an additional $126 billion in FY'08 war funding is still pending before the House and Senate.”

Furthermore, other costs such as care for vetarans, healthcare, military training/aid, secret operations, may fall under other departments or be counted separately.

Link.
Since it is a Youtube video that you sent me to, it must be true. Anyway, a less than believable newspaper doesn't believe John Perkins is telling the truth.

Perkins has tapped into a widespread fear. Thanks to the Bush administration, the mere mention of Halliburton is enough to prove the anti-corporate case to many bookshop audiences. But the truth is that corporations do not rule the world, and intensifying global competition has rendered them more vulnerable. Since the mid-1970s, when Perkins was touring the world as a hit man, fully half of the top 100 American industrial corporations have disappeared from that list. So what is this corporatocracy that Perkins fears? Is it the failing General Motors? Or vanished international banks such as S.G. Warburg? Or is it perhaps Chas. T. Main, Perkins's own employer in his hit-man days, which was swallowed up by a rival years ago?

From: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...AR2006022601265.html
Flat, since it is in the Washington Post, is must be true?

In general I like Mallaby, he has touted fiscal responsibility a time or two, however, just because he doesn't grasp or think Perkins is credible, doesn't mean it isn't accurate. Did he read the book? Or maybe the cliffs notes?

And what would one expect in general about anyone who comes out and says anything conflicting about government?

Whistle blowers are often crossed off of Christmas lists and marginalized.

In recent history, look at the people who came out and spoke up about Clinton or Bush. Why would they do it?

Money, power and politics are deeply intertwined and play a large role in how decisions are made and policy is carried out. Just look at how many lobbyists we have in DC.

And has our goverment/military ever sent in special forces or recon into places in secret? Are to believe that the NSA, CIA or FBI has are beyond any level of corruption? Unfortunately they are staffed by human beings and they can and do break the rules like everybody else. The difference? Because they're so secretive we may not hear about it, or maybe later if ever.

I've made no secret of my distrust of the government. When powerful people have no accountability and go unchecked, it sets up a scenario for unsavory things to take place.

It stands to reason that it may take an insider to expose some of the dirty laundry of the super rich and super elite.

I would encourage you to read his book, if your serious about this and decide for yourself.

regards, miamizsun
quote:
Originally posted by miamizsun:
Flat, since it is in the Washington Post, is must be true?

In general I like Mallaby, he has touted fiscal responsibility a time or two, however, just because he doesn't grasp or think Perkins is credible, doesn't mean it isn't accurate. Did he read the book? Or maybe the cliffs notes?

And what would one expect in general about anyone who comes out and says anything conflicting about government?

Whistle blowers are often crossed off of Christmas lists and marginalized.

In recent history, look at the people who came out and spoke up about Clinton or Bush. Why would they do it?

Money, power and politics are deeply intertwined and play a large role in how decisions are made and policy is carried out. Just look at how many lobbyists we have in DC.

And has our goverment/military ever sent in special forces or recon into places in secret? Are we to believe that the NSA, CIA or FBI has are beyond any level of corruption? Unfortunately they are staffed by human beings and they can and do break the rules like everybody else. The difference? Because they're so secretive we may not hear about it, or maybe later if ever.

I've made no secret of my distrust of the government. When powerful people have no accountability and go unchecked, it sets up a scenario for unsavory things to take place.

It stands to reason that it may take an insider to expose some of the dirty laundry of the super rich and super elite.

I would encourage you to read his book, if your serious about this and decide for yourself.

regards, miamizsun
miamizsun,

After the premise of your posted article is exploded, you spring the gold standard andUS has fiat money (as does every other country). Next, the shade of poor old MG Smedley Butler is dragged in for display. Butler died over 68 years ago, before Pearl Harbor. One suspects, if alive on 7 December 1941, his words would be, "Give me a gun and a marine division!"

Compare the discretionary spending growth if you wish to get a true picture of what drives the deficits.

As to the charts on military expenditures, training is in the budget. China, like the old USSR, hides a large portion of her military budget. In addition, the PLA owns several corporations, out right. Profits from those corporations go directly to the PLA and PLA-N.

As to the point of this thread, apparently, it’s to recycle old conspiracy theories. The left now competes with the old JBS for the Looney Tunes award.
quote:
Originally posted by Howard Roark:
miamizsun,

After the premise of your posted article is exploded, you spring the gold standard andUS has fiat money (as does every other country).

quote:
Are you saying that our military spending isn't related to our ability to borrow and print money?


Next, the shade of poor old MG Smedley Butler is dragged in for display. Butler died over 68 years ago, before Pearl Harbor. One suspects, if alive on 7 December 1941, his words would be, "Give me a gun and a marine division!"

quote:
Instead of going by what you think he might have said, I'll just go with what he actually said.


Compare the discretionary spending growth if you wish to get a true picture of what drives the deficits.

As to the charts on military expenditures, training is in the budget. China, like the old USSR, hides a large portion of her military budget. In addition, the PLA owns several corporations, out right. Profits from those corporations go directly to the PLA and PLA-N.

quote:
And?


As to the point of this thread, apparently, it’s to recycle old conspiracy theories. The left now competes with the old JBS for the Looney Tunes award.


Howard, I don't think so, the point is to point out that we are spending, as a country, way too much and that includes military spending as well(relative to the rest of the planet), along with our general view of war. We don't see the dead and dismembered and we don't see the bill/cost. Where are all of the embedded reporters now?

You're entitled to your opinion. If you think it is/was exploded, hold it dear my friend. We will just disagree.

Looney Tunes Award? I do tire of Bush and Clinton apologists, don't you?

Regards, Miamizsun

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×