The US would like to see budget cuts in the military

[Jagos]

Link

An overwhelming majority of U.S. citizens want deep and immediate cuts in military spending, according to a new poll. The Center for Public Integrity, a Washington, D.C.-based investigative news service, in conjunction with two other groups asked more than 600 Americans from across the country about their perceptions regarding U.S. defense spending. The survey went on to ask whether the respondent favored increasing, holding steady or decreasing military spending.

Seventy-six percent of survey-takers, including 90 percent of Democrats and 67 percent of Republicans, say they would cut the Pentagon's budget. That places the majority of respondents at odds with Democratic President Barack Obama's policies and the proposed budgets of the majority Republican Party in Congress. Obama has essentially held defense spending steady at around $550 billion by cutting its recent rate of increase. The Republicans have proposed adding billions of dollars to the president's budget.

I smell an ouster coming on... This Congress is truly losing legitimacy in a really bad way. Obama might gain a second term but I'm pretty sure that keeping the Tea Party in place will really destroy any chance of him actually being effective.

The military has been sitting pretty with their Billion dollar failure plane but those days may be going the way of the dodo. As expected, people don't like the ever present war state and constantly pushing for wars has gotten to a number of civilians. But how much longer can the politicians try to maintain that we need so much military expenditures when it's effectively done nothing but get contractors rich?

[Japan]

asked more than 600 Americans

Wow, that sure is a lot of Americans.

There have been cuts in defense spending, cutting a bit more would probably be prudent but you shouldn't forget that the defense industry also creates jobs, its not like all that money is going into one guy's pocket. (Only 75% of it.)

[Osterbaum]

You guys sure do spend quite a bit on defense. The map is from Wikipedia, but I checked some of the numbers from other sources and they match the map.

[Lumenskir]

Wow, that sure is a lot of Americans.

...Honest questions: (1) Do you know what a demographically representative sample is, and (2) Do you think that every American is asked a question when they say "X% of Americans believe Y"?

cutting a bit more would probably be prudent but you shouldn't forget that the defense industry also creates jobs, its not like all that money is going into one guy's pocket.

I think the simplest response to this would be something like "Why not divert that money into other job-creating but not people-killing areas, like health or public engineering or almost anything besides bombs and planes and weapons we don't really need?"

[Osterbaum]

...Honest questions: (1) Do you know what a demographically representative sample is, and (2) Do you think that every American is asked a question when they say "X% of Americans believe Y"?

To be fair, 600 does sound like a small sample.

[Japan]

I do know what a demographically representative sample is. I also know that most interest groups don't actually use those as they wouldn't portray the results they're looking for. 600 just seemed like a really farcical number to me and I thought I'd point out the humorousness of it with a sarcastic remark, sorry if you don't share my appreciation for incidental humor.

Also I'm quite sure they never ask every American these sorts of questions because they never ask me, and I number amongst that populace.

To respond to your third question I think it'd be fine to devote a large portion of defense spending to stuff that didn't directly relate to blowing up brown people. Unfortunately, I don't think we possess the ability to shift gears quite so fluidly as the imagination. It's a matter of shifting public opinion, building and dismantling infrastructures etc. etc.

Its not quite so simple as getting a few hundred rich old white men to check the box marked "flowers and puppies" instead of "kill dem' darkies."

The real issue here is, as is usual, no limits on campaign contribution and the fact that special interest lobbyists get to go apeshit all over Washington without so much as a "by your leave."

Without all these inside deals and backdoor politics you could most likely cut the defense budget in half and get twice as much out of it. There is absolutely no reason for things to cost as much as they do, when you remove the influence of the free market you end up with 300 dollar hammers and whatnot.

On a personal note, being familiar with department of defense software in various formats, the people we should really feel sorry for are the pilots. Holy shit that interface is going to suck balls.

[Mr.Bookworm]

http://the-diplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2012/05/14/americans-favor-military-cuts/

Jagos, protip? A blog is not a reputable source of news, in any context. That's the sort of thing that would make my fifth grade Social Studies teacher laugh at me.

Also, yes, 456 people is not the majority of the US, or a large enough sample size to make any statements about this sort of thing.

[Osterbaum]

A blog is not a reputable source of news, in any context.

Well it can be a good enough source to start a thread, as long as the blog itself links to other sources. Even then I feel it's important to point that out though.

[Fifthfiend]

Originally Posted by Mr.Bookworm

Jagos, protip? A blog is not a reputable source of news, in any context. That's the sort of thing that would make my fifth grade Social Studies teacher laugh at me.

Also, yes, 456 people is not the majority of the US, or a large enough sample size to make any statements about this sort of thing.

Your fifth grade social studies teacher was born forty years before blogs existed and infinity years before newspapers were reputable or non-laughable.

[Osterbaum]

Fifth is just defending blogs because he has one too! We're on to you, you're part of the machine!