Skip to comments.Reality Check: Entitlement Spending Dwarfs Wars Since 2001
Posted on 05/27/2012 2:21:15 PM PDT by Kaslin
Some bad news for the vehement anti-war set: they've lost the spending argument. A new chart reveals that in the last decade, spending on national security, Iraq, and Afghanistan combined paled in comparison to entitlement spending -- 19% to 65%, respectively. Over to you, infographic:
"About 65 percent of federal expenditures over the last ten years have gone towards entitlements,"Paul Miller writes. "By comparison, about 15 percent has gone towards national defense, excluding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iraq has cost three percent, and only about one percent has gone towards the war in Afghanistan (including the cost of ongoing military operations and all reconstruction and stabilization assistance combined), according to my analysis of figures from OMB."
In other words, Miller says, "Afghanistan is the second-cheapest major war in U.S. history as a percentage of GDP, according to the Congressional Research Service."
And of course, it's worth noting that war spending is about to decline, as our efforts abroad wind down, but entitlement spending will only grow as more people retire. For all President Obama's talk of a cheaper, "leaner" military, that's clearly not the area in need of a trimming.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
1) Just about anyone who looks at military acquisition know that acquisition is broken. Things cost too much, take too long, and often don't do what they were supposed to do.
2) Fixing acqusitions would be good.
3) Spending less on the military is a desirable and achievable goal.
4) Politicians are likely cut right down to the bone on military spending. They will weaken the country and they will still not achieve truly signifiant savings.
5) Real budget cuts are absolutely required. And this will involve deep cuts on the entitlement side.
6) Politicians will not cut entitlements in a meaningful way.
I think this leaves out the cost of ALL the disability claims being made, and they are SIGNIFICANT:
“Of new U.S. veterans, almost half seek disability aid”
It’s real simple. For every year Obama has been in office, one could COMPLETELY ELIMINATE ALL MILITARY SPENDING and each year the federal budget would still be in the RED as in deficit spending...
Lefties lie over and over that if we only cut the military all our social programs would be fine. The hungry would be fed, etc. That is flat out not true.
Entitlements and government employees are consuming everything. They are like locust and they refuse to move on until the country is barren.
it would be very interesting to show these numbers from 1960 thru today
maybe a bar chart, so the left can see how much has been spent in 50 years
i would also love to see a chart that shows US entitlement spending, in dollars, compared to all other countries, since they like comparing defense spending between countries.
even the most commie of socialist countries don’t spend anything like we do
Give me a break. How significant? We are talking total expenditures of 25 trillion.
Those figures are outdated. Actually, we’ve already crossed over that threshold. Mandatory spending (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food stamps, W.I.C, Unemployment, etc.) + interest on the debt (even at these artificially low levels) exceeds total tax revenues. And, as previously stated, both will continue growing rapidly near term.
Firing ALL federal employees would still leave us in the hole, without cutting entitlements. And no one is seriously proposing that, preferring to inflate.
We are effectively bankrupt.
Try $16 TRILLION!
Does that number seem familiar?
It is our national debt!
Wow, how is it that a broad-based payroll tax that, excepting the insidious EITC, affects all wage earners, brings in as much money as the highly progressive income tax, paid only by half of taxpayers?
It looks like total expenditures on that graph are about 25 trillion. It doesn't seem plausible to me that we only spent 750 billion on Iraq and only 250 billion on Afghanistan.
I only had time to look into this a little bit and it looks like these figures might be accurate if you don't count the interest on the borrowed money to pay for the wars or the additional costs for veteran care and benefits. If you do, the total cost for the wars ends up in the multiple trillions.
BYE BYE BARACK BIRD
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.