Comments about ‘Letter: Budget cuts are a bad idea if economy is to recover’

The letter makes it appear that all those defense cuts will happen next year. In fact, the cuts take place over a ten year period. Since we spend almost as much on defense as the rest of the world combined, that shouldn't hurt our defense capabilities by much.

With those kinds of numbers we could pay off all our enemies with a yearly stipend and still have the largest military. You also let the cat out of the bag. The way our military is structured with contractors and lobbyists it's the world's largest job creator.

Okay I'm sure that this won't get posted, but here goes.
Frank J. Gaffney Jr. is the founder of "Center for National Security" a right wing think tank that advocates for increased defense spending, and a strong national security. You can guess who funds them.
If the DNews is going to publish letters and editorials from the fringes, they should at least inform their readers of a person's ties to special interest organizations.

House Republicans need to start acting like real legislators rather than spoiled children who just want to choke the nation to get their way.

We need to remember that this "sequestration" was something shoved through by REPUBLICAN members of Congress.

They thought it would frighten Democrats into allowing their tax cuts for the wealthy. But it didn't and now those same Republicans are crying foul and trying to blame Obama for their stupidity.

They are counting on voters to have very short memories.

Unfortunately, many voters do.

The tea party wants to bring it all down so their gold is valuable.

Our ship (USA) has no rudder (leader). As Bill Clinton noted, Obama is in way over his head.

And yet, I see on the news that we'll dedicate billions to Afghanistan for the next decade. I know we're already sending billions in "foreign aid" (bribery) to Pakistan. We annually have "donated" over $1 billion to Egypt.

Yet... Our own infrastructure is falling apart. Schools, roads, health care, etc is falling apart. Heck, even here in Utah those homes burned recently in fires won't receive federal funding to help rebuild. So our own people suffer so we can give away billions in handouts to foreigners? who are oftentimes our enemies?

We are made to be such fools!

I love how we keep attacking entitlements but never mention the biggest ponzi scheme and entitlement of them all, our defense budget.

We should cut it in half RIGHT NOW and let the military cut the fat, fire bad employees, and become more accountable.

I AGREE with liberal larry of salt lake City, utah, DNews should at least inform their readers of a person's ties to special interest (R) organizations. As the American economy was cratering in the waning days of the Bush Administration, top lawmakers were remaking their own personal financial portfolios. 34 members of Congress made changes to their financial holdings after phone calls or meetings with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson his successor, Timothy Geithner or Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. The members of Congress, many in leadership positions in the House and Senate, changed portions of their holdings 166 times within two business days of speaking or meeting with the administration. John Boehner, R-Ohio, who was the Bush administration's point man in the House on the $150 billion stimulus package. On Jan. 23, 2008, after Boehner met Paulson for breakfast, he sold between $50,000 and $100,000 from a more aggressive mutual fund and allocated money to a more conservative investment. They shouldn't be making these trades when they know what they are going to do. Congress has an investing advantage over members of the public. Republicans in Congress must become more accountable.

My views.

Want to save Billions? Legalize, regulate and tax drug sales. All the law enforcement dollars, prison incarceration dollars and similar will benefit evryone. Regulating and taxing will raise Billions more. Many of us know drug users and few are a danger to anyone. Those who are can be dealt with.

Budget cuts are a bad idea if they want to get re-elected in 2012, and if economy is to recover on a Obama watch, without them taking credit, after they crashed America in the first place. All the GOP care about is more big guns for the hunters, subsidies for the Koch Brother's and their "Rich and Famous" friends. That's "welfare for the rich" government, subsidies to big business, pork-barrel Pentagon contracts to weapons makers, huge tax breaks for wealthy individuals, and most recently, colossal contracts for reconstruction to politically connected companies like Halliburton. Bureaucrats and politicians in Washington DC reminds me of "Elite Showdogs" that is an invitation-only e-mail list of long-time breeders, K Street and Wall Street exhibitors and judges that are judicial activist's. These politicians in Washington DC wear a GPS collar attachment to be found faster, so these K Street and Wall Street exhibitors can walk them around using a chain in circles until their dizzy enough to cave into them and give them what they want.

The problem with cutting the military budget is that there are thousands of companies and millions of private sector jobs that depend on government contracts. If those go away, guess what, the private sector is hit the hardest. This is why it isnt so simple to simply cut government spending. We can make cuts, but it takes a scalpel, not a sledgehammer.

Stockton, California is currently in pre-bankruptcy mediation and is preparing to file for bankruptcy within a week or two. The State of California will spend $16 billion dollars more in 2012 than they bring in, and are over $40 billion in debt.

When people, or governments, continue to spend more than they make they must inevitably go bankrupt sooner or later. The Democrat's answer is more taxes, but there comes a point where the taxpayers will revolt.

The conservative's answer is to get spending under control, and then and only then, consider new taxes to be used to pay down the debt.

Budget cuts are essential if government spending is ever going to match revenues.

Any student in any high school economics class could tell you that spending more than you earn is going to bankrupt you, sooner or later. That student could also tell you that taking all the money out of the private sector to pay for public sector jobs will kill all job creation in the private sector. That student, if he knows anything about government, would also tell you that the government cannot spend money until it takes money from the private sector.

Private sector jobs pay the taxes that enable the government to run.

Does it take 3,000,000 non-military government workers to do the 17 duties authorized to the Federal Government, especially when six of those duties are already being paid for by military spending? That means that there are 272,272 government employees for each of the remaining 11 duties.

How many businesses have 272,272 employees to do each of its "duties"?

Government can and must be cut.

Does it take 3,000,000 non-military government workers to do the 17 duties authorized to the Federal Government, especially when six of those duties are already being paid for by military spending? That means that there are 272,272 government employees for each of the remaining 11 duties.

Your really that simple, to believe that the same services enumerated from 200 years ago should be the same today.

This is the same reason Europe was in the dark ages for so long, religion dictating NO Changes allowed (conservative), even as the rest of the world was passing them by.

@ Happy Valley Heretic

You wrote: "Your (sic) really that simple, to believe that the same services enumerated from 200 years ago should be the same today.(sic)"

Yes, I am really that simple.

I simply believe that the Constitution really is the Supreme Law of the Land.

I simply believe that until it is amended, that we are bound by it and that the Federal Government is bound by it and limited to do only what we have authorized it to do.

I simply believe that the 10th Amendment clearly and unmistakably provided for every "duty" not authorized to be handled by the Federal Government.

I simply believe that true Americans know that a run-amok government is not in our best interests and that only by obeying the Supreme Law of the Land will this nation ever survive those who mock our freedoms and destroy our God given liberties.

A large central government feeds off of us and stifles us. A small central government is sufficient to protect us.

Those who are employed by the central government will always object to reductions. Let them read the Constitution and then defend their jobs.

"Real Maverick" For I think the first time, I agree with you!

The U.S. CANNOT AFFORD to continue to be the worlds policeman.

The problem is: the military/industrial complex lobby is very powerful. The other problem is the American public have become "conditioned" to believe they should be the "saver of all peoples".

Bad things happen to peoples of the world. Those countries need to determine their own destinies, their own way, with MINIMAL interference from the U.S.

To Mike Richards:
Should the federal government lay off all air traffic controllers? The Constitution does not list air-traffic control as a federal responsibility. And don't tell me a private company could do it. No private company wants to do it due to the liability issues involved.

@Mike Richards,

So in your world, the military can do no wrong. They cannot spend too much money. Only they are "worthy" enough of your tax dollars correct? They some how get a free pass to spend $2 Billion dollars per DAY and you have no problem with that whatsoever, right?

Just so you are aware, at the end of 2010, there were 2,840,000 non-defense federal employees. When the beloved great conservativce Ronald Reagan left office, there were 3,110,000. The US population has also increased from 226,000,000 to 330,000,000. The percentage of federal employees to US population under Ronald Reagan was 1.3%. Under President Obama, it is .8%.

@ Roland,

If you believe that we have a Supreme Law of the Land, then you'll also believe that either the Air Traffic Controllers fall under the Interstate Commerce Clause, or that the States have the duty to work things out. Personally, I believe that Interstate Commerce is addressed by Article 1, Section 8, "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"

@ CHS,

Whether the military can do no wrong is the wrong question. The right question is whether the Constitution gives Congress the authority to maintain a military, whether the Constitution allows the President to be Commander in Chief and whether you and I are obligated, as citizens, to support the Constitutional authority of Congress and the President when called to serve. We have Representatives in Congress who are there to listen to your complaints about HOW the military is run. They have absolutely no authority to dismantle the military unless they first dismantle the Constitution.

The responsibility of citizenship means that we all carry the burden to defend this nation. If we are not physically in the field, then we support the military with our dollars. No citizen is exempt.