Want to Cut Federal Spending? Go Where the Money Is.

[Donnachaidh]

http://www.otherwords.org/articles/want_to_cut_federal_spending_go_where_the_money_is

Name the last three presidents who significantly cut military spending.

If your answer is George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and Richard Nixon, you would be correct. To address budget deficits, Bush I and Reagan, in his second term, reduced military spending by a combined 23 percent. Perhaps even more apropos to today's fiscal realities, Nixon reduced military spending by a whopping 27 percent between 1969 and 1974 to pay for social programs he felt were important to our nation.

Legend has it that career criminal Willie Sutton, asked why he robbed banks, replied, "Because that's where the money is."

If we are serious about cutting or redirecting our federal spending to important priorities like health care and education, we need to go where the money is, too. Roughly 59 percent of discretionary federal spending is military spending. That's where we need to look.

More at the link --

[RandomThoughts]

1. LOL

Reagan did a revitalization and huge increase in Military, that was one of his big programs, rebuilt and unmothballed Carriers and Battleships, and increased military spending.

That is simply wrong.

Reagan increased spending in all sectors in first term, and may have cut a little later, but hugely increased military spending.

That is simply not true. Or all news at that time was backwards.

Increase in new balistic missles
wanted Increase in Star Wars defense
B1 bombers
Put battleships back in service
And increased navy, and recruiting.

[dkf]

2. Then we should get out of wars, not into them.