We're spending a lot of money on the military industrial complex.
For FY 2008, the Bush administration has requested $647.3 billion to cover the costs of national defense and war. This includes the Defense Department budget ($483 billion), some smaller defense-related accounts ($22.6 billion), and the projected FY 2008 cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and counter-terror operations ($141.7 billion). However, it does not include non-DOD expenditures for homeland security ($36.4 billion) or the Veterans' Affairs budget ($84.4 billion). Nor does it include the request for supplemental funds for outstanding FY 2007 war costs ($93.4 billion).The $647.3 billion request represents a 75 percent real increase over the post-Cold War low-point in national defense spending, which occurred in 1996. Today's expenditures are higher in inflation-adjusted terms than peak spending during the Vietnam and Korean wars -- as well as higher than during the Reagan buildup.2
That's over $850 billion on defense, on the books (which is probably above $1 trillion if you take off the books spending into account). In other words, a large swath of the American economy is a socialist corporate welfare state for defense contractors and Republicans.
And Americans are noticing, according to Gallup.
The public's view that the federal government is spending too much on the military has increased substantially this year, to its highest level in more than 15 years. Gallup's annual World Affairs poll finds more than 4 in 10 Americans now saying the government is spending too much for national defense and the military. Despite this, in recent years, Americans have also become increasingly likely to say the nation's military is not strong enough, with slightly less than half currently expressing this sentiment. Republicans are slightly more likely than Democrats to say the country's military is currently not strong enough; Democrats are much more inclined to feel the government spends too much on the military.
It's mostly a partisan split, with one significant exception.
Notice how independents are basically aligned with Democrats on the question? Look what else independents are aligned with Democrats on, from the latest data dump from Pew.
I wrote about this in 'Puncturing the Gunbelt'. There really are two economies, and it's not just rich versus poor. There's a militarized socialist economy composed of health care, finance, telecom, mainstream media, defense, aerospace, and large-scale agribusiness where the right-wing lives, and people there are largely doing great because the government has assumed all the risk while privatizing the rewards. And then there's the rest of the economy, which is paying for all of it. And that's where liberal Democrats and independents are living. This is the reason populism sells for both Democrats and Independents at this point in history.
The good news is that there's a realignment here. The slightly bad news is that I'm going to guess that Bush is not going to drop much below 30%. And that's not because the right cares about any cultural value except 'more for me, less for you'.
(Oh, and if you want to know why it is that Beltway consultants don't 'get it', recognize that a lot of them are feeding off the right-wing centralized media economy and the wealth and stability it brings. If they feel like parasites, it's because in a very real way they are.)
|
|
|
Permalink :: 12 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
