american,

I think the point they are making is that the government spending reaches more than just the men and women on the battlefield. It's all the jobs that support those men and women. There's always more than what we see on the surface.

If we cut the defense budget in half and redirect those funds elsewhere, we haven't cut anything. The Rs want to cut, cut, cut as long as it's not their state's jobs they're cutting. The Ds like to spend on entitlements but that doesn't net us anything in efficiency. I agree with infrastructure and grid updates. There's plenty more along those lines we do need to address.

Tiggle- the point im making is the they wont cut spending, so why waste that spending on something that does not invest in our future? dont have a major problem with money being spent, just what it is being spent on.

American...

While I agree that we should close many of our overseas military bases, and exact additional savings from the federal budget, blatant waste reduction would be a great place to start, I disagree with other portions.

Yes, we have many bridges and roads that need repair or complete reconstruction, that is not an overnight endeavor. Once the concept gets accepted, there are usually years of engineering, planning and construction to consider. And not many people are working in those initial years.

Rebuild the electrical infrastructure? Isn't that what we pay our utility bills every month for? I never knew that the Federal Government owns all of that wire we see running overhead (ok.. sarcasm switch turned off now). It is PRIVATE industry that builds and maintains the electrical grid.. not the government.

However, if the government provided low cost loans to business to repatriate CONSUMER MANUFACTURING factories from overseas, I would be all for that. THAT is what will create jobs. People working in factories making CONSUMER consumables, which get purchased, used and repurchased in a never ending cycle is what makes and creates jobs.

And lets keep the government out of it to the extent possible. I just read the following which was reported in Washington Times 24/7 (admittedly a right leaning publication) and is from Congressional testimony... make your own conclusion on how efficient "government" is... Republican OR Democart

The Obama administration spent $10 billion to create 355 renewable energy jobs per year, according to testimony offered Tuesday before Congress by a Congressional Research Services expert.

Asked by Rep. Cory Gardner (R., Colo.) “how many jobs were created” in 2009 and 2010 under the 1603 renewable energy grant program authorized by the Obama administration, a CRS specialist in public finance admitted that $10 billion was spent to create 3,666 construction jobs over a two-year period–and only 355 jobs per year going forward. ...

Read more: http://times247.com/articles/10b-in-green-energy-grants-net-355-jobs#ixzz1yQkmlBl8

XD- ive been paying my utility bills for over 15 years, i have yet to see anytihng upgraded or replaced in the period of time unless it fails. those same loans for buisnesses could also be made to utility companies to replace the existing infrastructure, which would also create a lot of jobs. plus the bonus there is if the infrastructure here is top notch then buisnesses would naturally want to set up shop here as an efficient reliable infrastructure would make said buisnesses more efficient and profitable. make this country the most inviting place possible to build a factory, run a buisness from and you wont have to offer them loans to get them here, they will beat a path to our front door and beg to be let in.

you are correct, our gov. is about as inefficient as it gets, and that does waste a silly amount of money. if we had people in the government who would use common sense for once that probably wouldnt be so bad. the government needs to be run like a buisness, not a gigantic bureaucracy- we need people who will oversee and look at the return on money spent so we dont have wasted projects like solyndra and others like it. if the united states of america were a buisness it would have gone out of buisness about 10 years ago.

we need to invest more in our future , not just today.

I'm all for reducing the military budget by 50% over the next 10 years. However, to do that we'll need to modify some treaties and give our allies some time to take up the slack (yes, Europe should have been spending on defense all along, but I don't want to leave them completely vulnerable without a few years warning).

As to what to do with the military budget savings, I'm ok with about a 50/50 split between helping the economy (ex: infrastructure, special loans, paying for tax cuts, etc.), and reducing the deficit.

American...

While I agree that loans could be made to help with infrastructure projects.. utilities for example, remember one point. Once that road is in, once those utility lines are installed, the work for the MAJORITY of those people end and it becomes a maintenance project... and those short term workers look elsewhere.

When you build a factory making CONSUMER products.... the things you and I and everyone else buys, the people in those factories are IN THE COMMUNITIES permanently.... generating tax revenue, income revenue for other CONSUMER manufacturing business and growing the local economy.

Factories are constant jobs. Infrastructure are temporary jobs. Granted the total project might be years to complete, but all the jobs on it come and go as the project progresses.

I've said this many times before and I'll continue to say it.

Consumer nations shrivel and die. Consumer nations grow and prosper.

The United States is a consumer nation. Yes we have decent exports, but that's mostly heavy industrial, or military hardware. How many people work making a Boeing 737 compared to the same dollar volume of say, sneakers. 50 million dollars for one plane employing we'll say 1000, or 50 million dollars for 1 million pairs of sneakers employing say 3000? Which would you rather see? (Obviously, I don't have actual employment numbers, but I'm sure you see the concept.)

American & XDm: GOOD Ideas..Lets support OUR future-quit feeding the War Machine & give our Veterans jobs fixing the infrastructure-and bring outsourced jobs back to America. Support OUR future, take care of AMERICA FIRST........

Two-faced tea bagger,

Although I voted for Obama, implying that he isn't a war hawk is misrepresenting reality. Obama has expanded our role in Afghanistan and Pakistan, gotten us into Libya and Yemen (and possibly other African nations), and looks like he may get us into Syria. I also don't rule out him getting us into Iran.

In fact, the only "war like" thing I like that he's done is follow Bush's timeline for getting us "mostly" out of Iraq. But, even then he's planning a major base in Kuwait now...

Lets be honest, we went into IRAQ with the Defense Industry blowing the horn all along. If you're objective was to remove a Dictator and create Elections then fine, we should have done that and moved to a small elite force on the outskirts who could strike at moments notice. But putting Wisconsin National Guardsman in the middle of Baghdad was BS. The Defense industry and the Haliburtons of the World greatly benefited from the blood of others. I'm not preaching, just stating a FACT.

Two-Faced Tea Bagger,

I never said the GOP did not support those military actions. But, that doesn't change the fact that Obama made the call to get involved (or increase our involvement in some cases) - he wasn't forced by the GOP.

I think you need to put aside the partisan hat for a second and evaluate the facts - not the party talking points.

From what I see, Obama is a war hawk - just like many in the GOP. I don't think the Democratic party as a whole is pro-war, but I definitely think Obama is.

Two-Faced Tea Bagger

Are the two brain cells for those two faces having trouble rubbing together?

And maybe you should check the news a little more closely. While McCain might say something, it is irrelevant. It is Obama that is pulling the strings now. If I'm not mistaken it was Obama that recently committed the US to at least 10 more years in Iraq, and it was Obama that expanded the drone attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Come back to reality. The Republicans AND Democrats bow down to the same powerful money interests. The only difference between them is which night they have their campaign dinner fund raisers on.

We are cutting our defense budget but let's funnel money to Kenya-

Barack Obama administration spending and projects in Kenya have become so voluminous that the U.S. Agency for International Development must hire more contractors to oversee endeavors other providers already carry out across the African nation. USAID in its own words admits that the “overall USAID/Kenya program has increased rapidly and exponentially, outstripping workforce resources available to effectively perform assessments and rigorous analyses … track results … manage recordkeeping, and other project development and program office functions.”

Ron,

Warhawks start wars.

Obama took military action in Libya and Yemen, true. But we didn't go to war. He took the smart approach and avoided costly wars in both cases. There is sometimes a need for military action especially if it prevents a war down the line.

Repubs wanted military invasion of Syria, Libya, Iran not limitied military action. That's being a warhawk.

The increases in Afghanistan and Pakistan, were necessary, anyone that claims otherwise is being disingenuous and would probably be first in line screaming Obama was weak on defense if he did otherwise. Regardless, those increases were more than offset by the reductions in Iraq, hence the defense 'cuts' that the military industrial complex is now decrying.

Every military action you complain about is a direct result of a necessary war on terror, yet limited in scope and far better than the alternative all-out war proposed by Republicans.

Obama took the smart approach?! Oh that's rich. Obama takes the lead from behind approach. He is sitting on his thumb while thousands of innocent women and children are being killed in Syria. What a buffoon, he is one and done- send him back to Chicago to take care of that cesspool.

Hank,

I respectfully disagree with your analysis. I do not think there was anything to gain by increasing our military presence in Afghanistan or Pakistan. Both of these countries have significantly different ideologies than the Western world, and I do not see anything positive coming out of our involvement there. The USSR tried for 10 years and all they did was bankrupt themselves.

Also, although the GOP did talk about more decisive action in Syria, Libya and Iran, I don't think it's fair to say McCain would have definitely gone in (he may have, but since he never had the authority to make that decision it's all just speculation).

I do not believe every action I listed is "necessary". War is not the only option, and I personally do not think the US should interfere in the internal affairs of other countries.

By the way, I am a veteran and I am not completely anti-war...but the only military action I agreed with over the last 12 years was the initial Afghan invasion - but I would have pulled out after ousting the Taliban.

Cutting defense is cutting jobs. Cutting the civil side does not? Who cares about Postal workers anyway.

The big issue is that cutting defense cuts stock value. All those defense contractors are publicly traded companies. Cutting main street is a good thing - cutting Wall Street is disaster. How can an 'inside trader' make any money on those sweet defense contracts if they are cut?

The only way to get the government to 'rebuild' infrastructure is to declare war on the United States. If Detroit declared war on the United States - the military would lob a few billion dollars worth of cruise missiles - declare victory - then rebuild the bridges, schools, highways, power grid.

Heck, the military has spent more on Kabul over the last decade than the government has spent on Detroit. War is good - don't ya' know.

Fleabagger: I do NOT bash Muslims, I DO bash Obama because he is a failure and only the last minions like yourself continue to defend him. I find it hilarious to hear you talk about McCain, because if you go to youtube and listen to the debates (take your fingers out of your ears while singing obama ma ma ma ma) and you will see all the lies and in fact most of the things he arrogantly chided McCain about, he has implimented. It's a done deal, he is gone in 2012.

This is just the result of the House GOP failing to compromise even after they got 80% of what they said they wanted.

They'd rather destroy the economy and the defense industry than raise taxes on the 1% to pay for the wars they started.

There is no money in peace.

Hello folks, what kind of stupid f#@k!n& article justifying war is this. No war no jobs! Is this an ignorance test? The presstitutes are once again spouting their propaganda and rhetoric for their corporate masters.

If their wasn't war the Federal Reserve would be gone and that would lead to an economic recovery! They start all the wars folks! They run the world, believe it or not!

Crystal I recognized your froth-at-the-mouth RIGHT WING IDEOLOGUE style on another board and was so impressed buy the over the top, untethered from reality appproach I was compellled to commment. I think assuming your are being disingenuous is an extremely charitable read on you. My advice is to wipe the saliva offf your keyboard and screen. TO just about everyone else on this board - COngratulations for discusssing the mattter from a reasoanabloe point of view.

If I remember correctly, it was Obama who escalated the war in Afghanistan to its current level and for what? Maybe his motivation was to avoid an increase in unemployment from all the troops coming home from Iraq. It still baffles me that most of his minions still believe he ended the Iraq war and overlook the fact that he built up the worthless war in Afghanistan.

american-400792, yes war is good for the economy. That is why we are war mongers. We kill, plunder and rape. That is what the American empire is all about. Wake up princess, the world is an ugly place. Don't you ever ask why do people fly into buildings?

American had me on the first post. Tell all those returning vets without jobs to go see the California Transportation Secretary who gaVE A $1.4 BILLION BRIDGE CONTRACT TO China saying Americans can't work on big projects and don't know how. Those vets can sit on the wall and watch imported Chinese labor, operating imported Chinese equipment build the bridge. It's not like they will have jobs to go to or anything. Somebody has got to get the idea that our gubmint employees are not working for us when they do this kind of thing. Dump him and get one of those vets in his job.

We wouldn't lose any jobs and we could keep up our terrorist training if we just refocused the war effort on inner city gangs!

There - I solved the problem.

IReadyou...

While I agree to a point, let us remember that it was the Govinator Arnold that approved that contract.

Of course, what is NOT being said about said contract is that it is NOW more costly than the American contractors bid, by several BILLION dollars, and it's also years behind schedule.

This article cracks me up. Cuts in defense? We aren't cutting anything! The 'cuts' are just reductions in the rate of growth of the military budget.

Satanick....

Shhhhhh....... that's a secret that NO politician wants to admit.

They think that 1000 plus 1000 is too much but 1000 plus 500 is a cut.

American

I agree with you. I would rather we spend money on building an infrastructure and needed programs for the weakest and sickest Americans. I would rather see them save Social Security and Medicare which saves lives rather than killing more people. We are always being told how important it is to pay off the dept, well the least painful way of paying off the dept is to shut down the military. They have never won a war since WWII and war is now about making money for contractors rather than solving world problems as we did in WWII. So why pay for a big military when we can let the businesses who wish to go to war to fund their own battles without involving the American tax payer. We have far too many problems at home that desperately need to be fixed than to play worlds policemen. Between our infrastructure, to our programs for the poor, to our collapsing police forces at home to foreign agents on our soil, we have enough trouble at home to bother with over there. We need to fix our roads, and more public transportation all across the US and just fix the human bonding between fellow Americans. As you can see the domestic needs are endless which we can no longer afford a big military.

If the Republicans take the White House in November, the Pentagon will have nothing to worry about, as the Republicans LOVE to spend lots and lots of money on Defense.....George W. Bush even started an illegal act of aggression ( euphemism for War Crime) against Iraq back in 2003...Iraq was NOT our enemy,had no WMD's, had NO role in 9/11 and there was no Al Quaida there when Bush bulldozed that Nation into a Civil War.....resulting in 6600 dead Americans 38,ooo wounded, 115,000 dead Iraqis, and the flight to Jordan of the Iraqi Christian population.......

So far, 50% of our war vets who have been to Iraq and Afghanistan, have filed Disability Claims with the VA......Americasn will be paying for Bush's war crimes for 60 years

Reagan poured Trillions of $ into Star-Wars and had to raise TAXES 11 times !

Nixon prolonged the War in VietNam by 3.5 years by interfering ( as a civilian) with the Paris Peace Talks.........which is a Felony..when a civilian participates in US Foreign affairs without credentials...Nixon was a civilian, running for President when he and Kissinger did this...probably a t the beck of Defense Contractors and lobbyists.

More pathetic liberal lies. Viet Nam was started by Kennedy and Johnson, without them Nixon wouldn't have had to get us out. Johnson also used the war to justify raiding SS and set a precident that all succeeding presidents followed.

Kennedy and Johnson are responsible for 50,000 dead Americans. That's a dozen times more than our entire Middle East death toll.

Not only did democrats overwhelmingly vote to go to war, they fully funded it even when they had complete control of congress.

Now that the snivelling little fascist in the white house is killing civilians we've turned two allies into two foes. Obama, like Kennedy and Johnson is the war criminal.

Bush captured Saddam and turned him over to their government. Obama assassinated Bin Laden. Where was his due process? Where was his criminal trial? Where is all the valuable intel we could have gotten from him?

I guess we'll have to start calling Obama the war criminal in chief.

A cut in defense spending or a reduction on the annual increase in the defense budget is all semantics. Unfortunately, to the civilian employees of the military industrial complex and all the surrounding communities, the "cuts" are real.

Cutting the defense budget in half would have a larger negative impact on the economy than if Obama had allowed GM and Chrysler to go bankrupt unaided.

If you cut the defense budget out of the national budget, it still would not be balanced. Furthermore, there would not be funds for infrastructure repairs because revenues from the military industrial complex and impacted communities would "dry up".

I do not agree with what we did in Iraq or Afghanistan. Rebuilding their nations while our nation crumbles is beyond explanation. China is in Afghanistan mining natural resources. We aren't getting anything but deeper in debt.

If the plan is to wind down defense spending, there better be something in the private sector that can generate tax revenues. Otherwise, if you think the impact of losing teachers, police officers and firefighters is bad...this path will prove worse.

For those not aware, much of defense spending is in the scope of research and development. R&D is the very core of innovation and growth, because growth doesn't just magically happen. Defense spending often brings about the emergence of new technologies indirectly, as the large scale of the projects demand innovation. An example would be MIT Lincoln Labs designing an air defense grid back in the 60's which required a network of computers that needed to communicate with each other in real time. Back then, that was a big deal, and ultimately when academic research uncovered a potential way for computers to interact in real time, government money went to those projects in the form of grants to see if such technology was feasible.

There are other examples, such as the internet and GPS systems. You typically don't see revolutionary new technologies from the private sector because companies don't have the means to fund projects that might not return an immediate profit on such a large scale. As you can imagine, the most revolutionary technology took many grants, researchers, and years to flesh out before it even became useful, much less profitable. Unlike economics, there really is a trickle down effect in government sponsored research.

"Boeing officials recently warned that any further cutbacks to defense spending could devastate the defense industry and lead to thousands of jobs lost."

Defense should not be exempt from cuts - it's part of 'shared sacrifice'.

Tiggle

The defense department has people to look after people, feed them, do laundry and so forth, just as they do in Vegas. They also built and fix things as they do in Detroit. In DC and Boston, they have lots of people who drive a desk and talk, the military has far fewer of them.

But, the Party of No says that the Government is not a job creator.

I guess they won't mind the loss of these "non-existent" jobs.

Liberals are the ones who are cutting them. Why do you think this article exists? Our economy is so bad that all these job losses will sink Obama! So what used to be the evil army is now a horrendous job loss. See how it works when you have to campaign 24/7?

Tiggle.... more often than not, management encourages it. It helps justify the cost over-runs and pricing increases.

In fairness, it is often the government also. Work on project will often stop because the Government manager needs to approve a modification or address an issue that has come up, and the "government" manager is in a meeting or on leave. And YES more often than not the only person with the authority to approve changes is single threaded... meaning if he/she is not there.. everything stops until they return.

Tiggle- you started your post with the old "a friend of mine"BS line.

I really have a friend working at Lockheed Martin & what you are saying is so NOT true.

Troll

Hannah....

It all depends on where you are.

Personally, I've SEEN LM employees asleep at their desks. Of course, I've seen Goverment employees close the door to their office and very shortly thereafter heard the snoring from said office....

Do I hold the contractor at fault? Nope. As I noted in an earlier post, more often than not, things come to a grinding halt because the government person with authority is single threaded and until he/she returns, work can and often DOES come to a grinding halt.

I've had many different jobs through my life and guess what? There will always be the lazy, dishonest workers who 'hide' and play games just like there are always the good workers who earn their money. You can not paint everyone with the same brush-just like saying all poor people are lazy & on welfare or all rich people are greedy & dishonest....

I can confirm what Tiggle and XDm have said. And not second hand, I've seen it personally.

I got a good chuckle when it took three guys and a crane to lift a piece of 3 ft x 3 ft plywood 10 feet on top of a shelter. And since they used the crane, no one else was allowed in the area to do work...

So that stoped 13 people from working... granted it was only 15 minutes, but you take 16 people (13 who had to stop work, and 3 to move the plywood) times 15 minutes times their salary... that was a very expensive project.

Unions have a purpose, but they do come at a cost and several have crossed the line into greedy.

Capn-1...

Actually when the crane was operating, there were a great number of things in play. You had the crane operator, and you had the guy on the ground watching for safety related issues, you also had the guy watching the load and giving guidance to the crane operator. Government mandates by the way, not necessarily union.

And as far as the other guys stopping work, again, government mandates courtesy of OSHA. And if you ever want to see an entire project shut down in a heart beat, see what an OSHA bureaucrat can accomplish with a flick of a pen on a piece of paper.

In reality, you can't blame the unions for that.

This is all typical union. I've also witnessed it and was part of it when I had a union job. The most I worked was 40 minutes a day due to union "work rules".

Want a new building? That's iron workers. Then you need stairs! That's the carpenters. But stairs need railings! That's the finish carpenters. And on it goes.

Unions goal is to do as little as possible with as many as possible for as much as possible, screw the company.

The article leaves out the fact that soldiers returning from overseas will be creating demand at home. They will need to be fed, clothed, housed and so on. Also the money they were spending overseas that was going into overseas coffers will begin to be spent back in the United States.

So you'll ask where the money will come from. At first it comes from savings, severance, and from the families they return to. But it will also come from entrepreneurs that recognize and forecast an increase in demand. And they will need to hire workers to fill that demand. People can get loans to start businesses. They can get loans to get an education.

In short it's not just a vacuum that will happen when soldiers come home and no longer get a paycheck from the military. It creates demand here and that creates jobs here.

The Military Industrial Complex & our Shadow Government will always have the support of Professional Politicians tha are getting their Bread Buttered on both sides. It matters not which Party is in the White House. A reduction in the rate of increases towatds the "Defense" Budget is cut. It will not be the true cause of the Bubble Popping, but the entire matrix of lies and fabrications used to prop up our false economy snap when the lack of substantive ability to 'grow' the jobs market fails while we ignore that the US has become a Service Economy. The Corporate Heads will reap their fortunes until the last factory closes in The UJnited States.

Taking this into a Union Bashing discussion is absolutely just a weak attempt, though typical, at switching Truth into distractive Talking Points. Please refrain from such. Their are plenty of opportunities for your bashing on appropriate articles.

Thanks XD for keeping it real.

Peace

Bushbama 2012

Not true. Only a fraction of Lockheed employees are union. Mostly line and production. Lots of engineers and other technical types that are not. The upcoming potential sequestration could cost many of your neighbors their jobs. Because it wouldn't be you that loses your job doesn't make it unimportant to others that might.

Actually when the crane was operating, there were a great number of things in play. You had the crane operator, and you had the guy on the ground watching for safety related issues, you also had the guy watching the load and giving guidance to the crane operator. Government mandates by the way, not necessarily union.

It wasn't that kind of crane. Just a light one (3 or 5 ton maybe) that slides around on the roof, so one of those three guys had the remote control to operate it.

My point though was that one guy could easily have carried it up the ramp to the top of the shelter.

So instead of that project (bringing the plywood plug up to cover a hole so no one falls in) costing 0.25 man hours it cost 4 man hours for such a stupid simple thing. The billable rate for engineers (13 of them standing around doing nothing) is something around $200+/hour for each engineer. It's similar to auto mechanics where the shop charges you $80+/hour for labor even though the mechanic only gets a fraction of that.

The award for Dumbest Statement f the Week goes to ..... shark-1185366. It is clueless people like you who are the reason Obama's and Pelosi's get elected and our economy is forever trashed.

This country need to start making something besides war. War doesn't produce anything. It just destroys. Put that money back in our country, invest in business in our country, don't just send money to another country just to be blown up and kill.

STexan,

Can you please explain why Republicans, and specifically the Tea Party, want to greatly reduce government spending as long as it's not defense that's getting reduced?

Either you want to cut the size of government or you don't. If you do, it has to be cut everywhere. Does their position not seem hypocritical?

This is pretty easy because defense is one of the very few government paid efforts where people in highly skilled jobs work. Cut defense and now you have more unemployment and it also hurts overall GDP. Democrats know this too. They TALK a lot about slashing defense but Democrats aren't that serious about it. It's just to get the feeble minded rank and file voter to believe they are serious about it. Seems it works.

Why does the US have to be the police for the rest of the world? Why can't we remove some of our military support from Europe and Japan, and let them pay more of their own defense bills?

I do support having a strong national defense, but how strong do we need to be? Look at what happened with USSR when they overspent on defense - the same thing can happen here.

The US does not have unlimited monetary resources. We can spend ourselves into disaster.

I'm a small government person, but that small government approach applies to BOTH entitlements and defense spending.

The award for Dumbest Statement f the Week

Economics > You

http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/90/11/Spending_Nov_Dec1990.pdf

Sadly that is exactly what our military is trying to sell us on. Of course to sell us on something Competency is needed. Our military blows it more times than not so why throw money down a black hole?. I remember when 7 CIA agents were easily blown to bits right on a military base. Well why was the military so sloppy? do we want to trust such sloppiness? If I were in the CIA I would NEVER do a joint operation with the military again do to such lack of security. You know what they say it is either extream sloppiness or deliberate. If sloppy than one does not want to put your life in their hands. If deliberate than one does not trust those guys again. Of course deliberate would hold much more dire problems. The answer is for someone in a better position than myself to decide.

Max, you have no real idea of what "military jobs" are. Many technology items out there in the market are because of defense industry R&D. Look under the hood, don't rely on the media to supply yourself with an opinion.

Speaking of Looney Tunes I guess you have been lost ever since OWS fizzled out. Why not try a new line? Considering our unemployment is higher than when Obama took office I feel there is enough fuel to burn on politics without adding this.

Guess its great we shut down our space program. We could have been investing in the future instead of kick backs to the "green Energy" sector that never produced any real jobs.

I'm not a big Obama fan, but come on now. Surely you don't ignore what happened before he took office.

It's like your blaming the cough for the cold.

proudamericanveteran,

I'm not directly involved with NASA, but the job I had most of the last 20 years was setting process and procedures for a global software company. As part of that job I studied processes at a large variety of organizations and worked with others that did the same (you could think of it as sort of a process think tank position).

In the early 90's NASA was praised for it's detailed processes, but by the late 90's and early 00's, even NASA's internal studies came to the conclusion that NASA had become a bloated bureaucracy that stifled innovation and increased costs. Unfortunately, it's very hard for an organization to change once it gets that inefficient - especially when it's not subject to the market corrections that happen with private companies.

Due to this experience, I think using more private companies instead of NASA is a good idea. The space industry is far enough along now that private ventures are starting to make sense economically, and they will be much more efficient with resources than I think NASA will be.

That's why I support Obama on this decision.

Glenn...

Invariably, government contracts go out and they truly don't know what they want.

We want to build something, but we're not really sure what yet, but here's the start-up money so get started... is more often than not the norm.

F-35 is a prime example. Joint strike fighter... all of a sudden it needs to be re-engineered for carrier operations, oh.. don't forget VTOL for the Marines... VTOL is in final testing, but cancel that... we don't want it any more.

Contractors more often than not really try to help, but when they tell someone that the request isn't practical, they get the look and are told "my boss wants it, so we'll give it to him"... not too many government "employees" have the balls to tell their boss he/she is an EFFING IDIOT and the "request" is insane.

It is more about PORK, than not knowing what they want. "Joint strike fighter", the criteria is given with the parameters of expectations, design and capability is the responsibility of bidder. The review, alteration, compatibility studies, etc. should all be in place prior to awarding a bid (at least that how it works in the peon world).

Government contracts are about who you know and who you blow. Typical goverment contract is to buy 100,000 standard toilet seats for $1500 each when the specifications were for handicapped toilets which require elongated seats.

Paul....

Come on... the real world that most people work in is in no way shape or form anything similar to government work.

The criteria with expectations are so broad and vague, you don't know if they're asking for a two car garage, or a 5 million square foot tier 4 data center.

I've worked for military contractors, changes after changes after changes. Without cost plus, contractors would go broke or be in constant contract renegotiations.

If you 2 folks would read what I said, you would see that I said,

the real world that most people work in is in no way shape or form anything similar to government work.

(at least that how it works in the peon world).

The criteria with expectations are so broad and vague, you don't know if they're asking for a two car garage, or a 5 million square foot tier 4 data center.

That is correct. That is where the pork comes in. In the real world all parties know what the widget is intended to do, how, when, why and what it is supposed to look like. You bid it on equal ground with everybody, the lowest or best bid should be awarded on the grounds of design, merit and cost BUT only after careful review but we all know the bids are just a formality because the bids are awarded on the payback system.

Back in yesteryear when our government wasn't corrupt, the DOD built aircraft and equipment specific to meet the needs for each branch of the service. Long range bombers just could not be designed for Navy use. The Navy had aircraft designed to meet their needs and other branches of the service also found some that work well for them also. (Ex.the F4) The Air Force had the C130 (which they said would never fly) that all branches of the service use today because of its versatility. It has been in production for over 60 years.

I've worked for military contractors, changes after changes after changes. Without cost plus, contractors would go broke or be in constant contract renegotiations.

That's right, because it was intended that way to pay back favors. Most change orders are for crap that was poorly designed and didn't work and if any kind of real review of design and specs was done, the flawed assemblies would have been identified before the bid was awarded.

Corruption plain and simple!

There is a ton of military research going on in numerous fields.

Plenty of research goes on at colleges too...military is the least efficient way to do R&D or create "jobs"...

Would you clean bed pans in a severe mental institution?

My point is, some jobs are not worth taking no matter how much you may need the money. As a 1st world country, there are jobs we just won't do.

I'm so sick of reading/hearing that statement, especially when the whole thing was started and edited completely out of context by the conniving vermin on the right when talking about immigration. The correct statement should say "there are jobs we just won't do... for $2.50 an hour (or even less)." Americans are NOT lazy, looking for a handout, nor have a sense of "entitlement", we simply cannot and should not have to compete with 3rd world labor wages!

Don't look at me. I'm a progressive. Retired early with no need for anyone's help. That's because I got my help--parents immigrated here after WW2, I got federal student loans, unemployment when I needed it, wife gets social security early. I'm just giving you the other side's view. Now, I am being asked to pull up the ladder behind me. Should I?

"My point is, some jobs are not worth taking no matter how much you may need the money. As a 1st world country, there are jobs we just won't do"

Sorry but that attitude has to stop immediately, period. If that's the only job available, do it. There are no dignified jobs, just people dignified enough to do the job. It is not shameful to empty bed pans, it's shameful to refuse the job because "it's beneath you", or "it doesn't pay enough".

There is a point of diminishing returns Phil. There are a LOT of jobs out there that at minimum wage or below it just wouldn't pay a person to take. By the time they paid their fuel costs, factored in vehicle wear and tear, any special uniforms or safety wear, ect.. ect.. the worker would come up with a net loss even after working a full week. There are jobs that just aren't worth it if they don't pay the worker a wage where he can do better than break even!

The federal government is not responsible for funding education. That is up to cities and states. The federal government is responsible for defending the country.

Peter17 - The best way to defend the country is to educate it's citizenry:

"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance" - Derek Bok

They seem to be building schools in Iraq and Afghanistan so they can build schools here ! Dept of Education is a govt agency, They put out guidelines for what is required to teach so yes they do affect spending on each student.

Peter, the Federal government gives billions to states in the form of education subsidies from kindergarten to doctorate level.

The only schools that are exempt from this are private schools.

We have no shortage of schools, we have a shortage of competent teachers. We have and over abundance of incompetent ones thanks to the unions though.

Kevin... you must be VERY young... Vietnam.. Kennedy initially, greatly expanded by Johnson.. if my memory serves me, they were Democrat. Before that, wasn't it a Democrat that involved us in WWII?

But in reality, it really doesn't matter.... it was BOTH Democrat and Republicans in Congress that authorized those operations and funded those operations.. or doesn't that matter as long as you can blame Republicans.

Personally I blame ALL politicians for our current situation, and I blame the American people for failing to buy American made products from American owned companies.

It was also a Democrat (Truman) who got us into the Korean War and a Democrat (Clinton) who got us into the war in Bosnia.

Yeah, Iraq and Afghanistan didn't happen because the Bush presidency never happened and shouldn't be discussed.

Meantime, every Republican leader has called for action on Syria, Iran and whatever else crisis turns up (and then blame Obama if he does anything at all, but that's another story).

So you guys feel a need to bring up events from 60 years ago., forgetting the pressure republicans put on the white house, congress, and the nation to escalate wars.

You do remember Barry Goldwater, don't ya ?

Bravo Hank.

Hank..

Why is it that some posters can go as far back in history as they want and others get castigated for it?

And as far as blaming, Obama is blaming everything possible, Bush, Tsunamis, Europe, and anything else except himself for his own failures.

Personally, I think they all suck, whether Republican or Democrat. If you're honest with yourself, you'll realize that regardless of political "affiliation" they all feed at the very same trough of money laid out before them and bow down to the same masters. Or is that too honest?

Hannah....

Who is posting lies?

And I can assure you that workers, whether union or not will take advantage of a situation if they are given the chance.

I WAS a union district steward, and I had to defend people that if I was management I would have fired myself. But, I had to play the game and defend them, and I did successfully. It really didn't matter, because ultimately, they were fired anyway, but the company suffered with them and their lack of ability and work ethic for several years. Oh, the others that suffered? They were the guys union co-workers, including me, who had to pick up the slack for the slackers.

Don't get so defensive until you've seen ALL sides of the issue.

Unions have their place, no-one denies that. But unions also have to be realistic in their demands and work to cull their own ranks of slackers.

Unions again, huh.

The Richest have and will ALWAYS get Richer, even if you have the largest Unions involved with some slackers. Must be true what XD says that much of the inefficiencies are management derived. You can only do what work is doable, and in position to be productive. Making accusations against Unions as being the cause of failure in this economy is a convenient dodge of the real issues.

Talk about slackers...

I am Union and I bust my ass. And I agree that we should cull the slackers. But overall the Professionalism of Union Employees is much higher than Scab Labor.

Stop accepting your retirement benefits, overtime, vacations, sick days, insurance and most every other benefit that comes with your gig, and keeping conditions livable/safe on your own jobs, because you would not have them without these Unions you Bash.

Just keep pretending your biiterness is anything but displaced blame and ignorance. I gotta pull my earnings in the morning for about 10 hours or so, so good night all. i will bet my ass I work harder than conservatively 90% of you posting drivel.

Bushbama 2012

Complete BS, George.

One, most of the defense cuts are a result of winding down 2 wars. No one is blaming anyone for those cuts either way.

Two, other defense cuts being made are a result of the deal to cut across the board if substantial deficit reduction wasn't agreed upon.

Blaming the dems for blaming the repubs is a lame attempt at making some kind of BS partisan point. Fact is that any defense cuts are a result of ending wars and bipartisan gridlock in congress.

Partisan trolls get really tiresome.

On one hand I agree. On the other - I'd rather we reinvest that in Infrastructure and Education than just stop altogether.

The more infrastructure we have - the better our businesses can use them to boost the economy.

Education pays for itself in the end: The better educated you are, the better paid you'll be, the more taxes you'll end up paying, which pays for the money spent to educate you.

Ebeneezer, I would agree with regard to infrastructure. The state of many of our roads and bridges is pathetic, if not dangerous. More money to Education? No. Our current K-12 funding is the highest in the world (~20% more than Germany). More money is not a fix for problems at that level. College? The reason these prices continue to increase well beyond inflation is the prevalence of easy loan money (and grant money). Throwing more money at this only makes things worse. I went to a private MN college 1975-79, for ~$4,000 per year. I got a job in my field right away starting at $12,500. This same college announced room & board for next season at $44,500. Can these graduates expect to earn $139,000 as a starting salary? I think not.

While SOME roads and bridges are in dire need of repair/replacement, the vast majority do not. Our infrastructure is better off than the fear mongering would suggest, can you say vested interest? :<)

So, don't expect our economy to gain one iota due to infrastructure expenditures.

Someone earlier mentioned smart grid. It's already been done in much of the US, there are few gains there. Utilities have done it on their own because it saves them money. Our entire county has smart meters, and you can volunteer to have some of your appliances controlled via the grid.

Smart grid does not mean rewiring the nation, it means instaling better communications and control. That is being done with current personnel. The problem is it doesn't create jobs, it eliminates them. No more meter readers!

Austerity isn't the cure for being broke, it's the result OF being broke. The alternative to voluntary austerity is spending ourselves into bankruptcy and forced austerity. I guarantee the latter is far more painful.

There is no alternative to austerity, stimulus only digs the hole deeper. If deficit spending were the answer Greece would be bailing out Germany.

Dan...

Are you or were you a member of The Old Guard, or do you just like the picture?

Dan: This country would benefit a lot from some of these ideas-I dont care anymore about R vs D-I want all outsourced jobs brought back to the U.S. and I want the defense budget spent on the U.S. infrastructure and I want our Veterans to have jobs and medical help and I want XDm to run for President....

Peace.... THANKS!!!!! I only wish I could. I'm not wealthy enough, don't have the good looks, and DEFINITELY don't have any political party backing, nor would I want it, and write in campaigns are too cumbersome if not impossible.

But there is so much that can and should be done if people would only stop the party ideological fighting and actually HONESTLY look at the problems and possible fixes.

XDm: I think your honesty & rational thinking would hold you back........

Yes it would.... people don't like to hear the truth... it hurts too much.

Besides, like I said, I'm not pretty and don't have the oratorical skills they have. I speak too bluntly.

People vote for the appearance and not the substance. Hence the problems we have.

Yea, let's cripple Boeing, one of the few high value exporters we have.

The federal government no longer has the money to "stimulate" the economy. $5 trillion in additional debt over the past 3 years has given us weak economic growth and a debt to GDP ration above 100%. It is time to take our medicine for spending more than we have been willing to fund. We will not see an economy "gaining speed" for at least the next decade.

Peter17... you're being very generous. I'd say for at least the next 2 or 3. We're in VERY serious trouble that 99.99999999999999% of people either don't recognize or refuse to acknowledge.

I'm just hopeful I can ensure my grandchildren don't suffer, but obviously I can't guarantee that so I hope.

And the longer we go the worse it will be. Do we want to start bailing water when we are $16 trillion in debt with low interest rates or $40 trillion in debt with high interest? Interest rates will increase probably starting next year and that could easily eat up discretionary spending alone.

I think XD is right. When we head over the cliff it won't be a gentle slope, it will be a precipice

Gee, who would have thought that almost any government spending affects private sector jobs, as well as public sector.

Duh, evidently anyone except the repubs.

As an extra added bonus, all the unemployed U.S. workers will get to compete with about a million bilingual illegals