What is the private sector?

[Flopper]

That isn't the only reason but is certainly one reason as government jobs were saved and created using he stimulus money, we saw private sector jobs dramatically decreasing. And no matter how much the government spent, the unemployment rate remained stuck.

Please explain how government job creation dampens private sector job creation if there is no additional taxes being collected to pay for those jobs. Granted the jobs are being paid for using borrowed funds, but those funds are not needed to create jobs in the private sector. Corporations are awash in cash and profits plus the funds are coming from global sources not just US corporations.

 

[Samson]

yes, I agree Foxy....the money for gvt contract jobs does come from the tax payer and it still does take money out of the private sector, as in...our own hands....(while redistributing it to other private sectors)

but the contract job that taxes is paying for, is still counted as a private sector job on all the reporting on such and i suppose, even if inefficiently, it still is adding to the profitability and gdp of the private sector....via the hands of citizen's taxes.

I know, but in my opinion, because it has negative effect as much as positive effect, it is disingenuous to score it that way and it is just more smoke and mirrors to boost the positive reputation of whoever happens to be in power. Both parties do it. And both are furthering an untruth when they do.

so, cut defense spending now, without worries of what those budget cuts will do to those jobs?

I think Navy is saying in so many words, it will hurt the economy or private sector jobs if we cut defense spending.

I think you are correct, but defense spending is a tad different than just "spending." On the one hand I believe DOD takes advantage of this difference, but on the other i can see why it may be justified to some degree.

The domestic industries that support our modern military are specialized, but moreover the engineers and other personnel that work in these industries are specialized. We cannot expect them, or others in the future to invest themselves in defense industries in which the DOD won't invest.

INVEST is a key word here: you don't just grow manufactures for smart bombs over-night.

 

[Navy1960]

Update; Navy is for non-institutionalized Defense Spending, that A. promotes competition, B. is cost effective, C. IS ON TIME, D. Meets the Needs of the Service, E. Can be cancelled for non peformance, with full refund, F. Is Fixed Cost. Thats just a little bit of what I am for, I think if DOD did just a few of those, then we might find spending massive amounts of money on Defense each year around 5% of our GDP would not be needed. In fact when compared to the nation that spends the next closest to us China at 1.6% 700 Billion US to 97 Billion for China you begin to see that the way we buy things has more than a little to do with spending too much too. Just wanted to clear that up, that I am not for unrestricted , free spending, and uncontrolled Defense Spending.

 

[Foxfyre]

Also defense spending in order to provide the common defense is a constitutinal REQUIREMENT of government. When the government does that competently, a strong national defense ensures that nobody is going to be crazy enough to attack us, and if they do, they will be immediately flattened. A strong defense almost ensures that it will be very rarely necessary to actually use it.

And because that, along with other Constitutional protections, secures our individual rights and liberties, that leaves us free to pursue whatever in the way of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness we are motivated to do.

But please know that the defense budget and spending on the common defense are not necessarily the same thing. There are hundreds of billions that can be cut out of the defense budget--just go with Navy's insistance of HOW we should demand that defense expenditures be managed to accomplish humongous savings--without weakening the common defense one bit.

As long as the defense budget, along with other government monies, is used to throw bones to donors, supporters, cronies, and other pay offs, the defense budget will continue to be excessively bloated. We should deal harshley with cutting real defense, which too often more liberal presidents do, while not touching those monies uses for payola. And also politicians who use the defense budget (or any part of the budget) to frighten people for political gain.

Example:

When Obama and the Democrats waned to raise the debt celing, they threatened that the ones would otherwise wouldn't get paid would be Social Security Retirees, Social Security disability, Federal Retirees, and MILITARY RETIREES and VA BENEFITS.

They did not threaten to stop payments to illegal aliens or take internet access away from prison inmates

They did not presume to fire any of the czars or any of their own staff or any other non essential federal employees.

They did not suggest cutting back on their own salaries or benefit packages or lucrative expense accounts and travel budgets.

No benefits to welfare recipients were mentioned as being in jeopardy.

And foreign aid would presumably continue as always.

But the left will almost ALWAYS target defense for budget cuts before anything else while the Republicans will almost ALWAYS target other than defense before anything else.

And neither are being honest re what really needs to be cut.