Critics Of Govt Spending Forcing The Army To Build Unwanted Tanks
Posted in the Minneapolis Forum
#2 Apr 30, 2013
Rocket Scientist,Thanks for the Reporting.
Political Cronyism is a fairly recent problem ya know!
I would rather spend the Confiscated Wealth of Hard Working Americans on projects that benefit the Political Aspirations of Politicians that YOU agree with.
I understand how Indignant you must be!
Hey have any of Amerika's Union Corporate Boards decided if their Dependents should strike, to put an end to this Cronyism?
Maybe the CEO of the Tank Builders Union can get his Corporate Board to authorize a Strike?
Certainly the Shareholders that control the Corporate Board can force them to direct the Union CEO to act?
#4 Apr 30, 2013
Congress is forcing the Army to spend nearly half a billion dollars building tanks that Army officials insist they don’t want, with money they say could be better spent elsewhere, according to a new report from the AP.
Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) are the two members of congress at the helm of the effort to spend $436 million on upgrading the Abrams tank,“a weapon the experts explicitly say is not needed.” The reason? Both represent Ohio, home to the nation’s only tank manufacturing plant, which would profit from the money.
The move is contradictory for the two politicians; both are also vocal advocates for fiscal austerity, and have made careers insisting that the government cut what they see as wasteful spending. It would seem that pushing for tank production against the will of the Army — as Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno put it,“If we had our choice, we would use that money in a different way”— is in direct contradiction to that aim.
Still, Rep. Jordan defended his request for the funding, saying,“The one area where we are supposed to spend taxpayer money is in defense of the country.” This is a common line among Republicans. The House GOP’s proposed budget also seeks to restore funding the military says it doesn’t need.
Indeed, Republicans have tried to maintain defense spending while pushing for cuts to mental health programs, cancer treatment, food safety inspectors, and preschool programs. They have repeatedly ignored or dismissed the assertion from military generals that President Obama’s budget, which would have made targeted cuts to military programs, was an acceptable path to spending reduction.
A cut to one specific program would by no means be a drastic setback for the military; between 2001 and 2011, military spending nearly doubled. American voters, much like the military’s generals, also support scaling back the military’s spending.
#5 Apr 30, 2013
Ya, I believe that I mentioned that we should spend the Confiscated Wealth of Productive Americans on your kind of Political Cronyism.
I have a radical Concept for you.....Take a seat, this will knock your socks off......Ready?
Maybe if the American People that "EARN thier Living" (Google this,) were able to keep the 48% of their Income that is confiscated by the State via the Force and Power of the Collective, the Meals they Eat, would not need to come on Wheels.
#6 Apr 30, 2013
Earn their WELFARE, like you ??
#7 Apr 30, 2013
Meanwhile, From the Seattle West Insane Asylum......
Well the Beds are made, the Oatmeal is eaten, and the Medications have been Injected.
It is time for the Seattle Psychotic to spend the day seeing "Slewblomkin" pasted all over the Thread List.
#9 Apr 30, 2013
Earn their WELFARE, like you ??
Add your comments below
|Liberals are phony people||36 min||Space ace||1|
|Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10)||49 min||Mothra||37,414|
|Trump to Mexico: U.S. 'will be there for you' a...||10 hr||Bad COP No dognut||4|
|somali average iq||11 hr||Space ace||1|
|The end of Madcow||12 hr||Cat Fan||13|
|St Louis forum||14 hr||Crassus||1|
|Rocket Man!||15 hr||Bad COP No dognut||7|
Find what you want!
Search Minneapolis Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC