12-02-2007
|
|
Owner, Green Bay Packers
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SW Michigan
Posts: 10,322
Rep Power: 9
|
|
|
Quite so, and defense spending is truly the way to waste government money, with thanks to PJ O'Rourke for the idea. Aging B-52's cannot fly down Main Street of downtown Baghdad, wait patiently for the light, turn right on red, and blow up the Ministry of Coercion, and not damage the hospital adjacent. Cruise missles can. And due to a relatively low production run and certain marketing difficulties, they run out at a cost of approximately US$ 1 million. Pretty pricey, no? But then, when it absolutely, positively, has to be blown up before 10 am, who ya gonna call?
A little observed facet of the defense department budgeting is the conflict between DoD and the Congress. The DoD is known for a certain expertise at blowing things up, killing the enemy, and doing it all with a minimum loss of American lives. Quite a resume but it won't get them a seat at any Rotary luncheon. Congress is best known for being in the preservation business. and the thing they like to preserve best, and spend an inordinate amount of time preserving, is their own job in the Congress. To the extent that their re-election efforts coincide with constituent needs, they represent their constituents. In Congresssional defense appropriation hearings we find the curious spectacle of Congressmen arguing for for funding of submarine shipyard projects while the Navy is calmly trying to assert that it has quite enough submarines at the moment, thankyou. Similar imbroglios take place over every facet of defense spending. The most pacifist, anti-military congressman suddenly becomes a military strategist on the order of Wellington when the DoD decides the airbase in his district is unessential.
Like all matters congressional, waste is defense spending that occurs out of district. A brief examination of Congressman John Mutha's Pensylvania district might lead one to believe that one was viewing the heart of the American military-industrial complex. Eisenhower was not exactly correct. Congress has obviated the need for a military-industrial complex. In fact the DoD's biggest chore is getting from congress what it actually needs instead of what 535 elected military experts would like to give it. And that's one of the reasons the Pentagon is the world's largest office building. (g)
The aforementioned PJ O'Rourke has an instructive, and down-right hilarious, book published called, "Parliament of Whores", subtitled, "a lone humorist attempts to explain the entire US government". It is well worth reading for a perspective on how the whole mess of the Federal government manages to work, a little bit. DoD actually comes out quite well in it despite the $600 toilet seats. The reason being is that DoD is one of the few government agencies that actually accomplishes what it's paid to do. Contrasted with agriculture, where we spend billions and yet see no drop in food prices and farmers continuing to go out of business as fast as "for sale" signs can be printed, the DoD budget is money well spent. It's the only area of government where you really do get some bang for your buck, literally and figuratively. (g)
__________________
“Scientists are people who build the Brooklyn Bridge and then buy it.”
Wm. F. Buckley, Jr.
|
Connect with Facebook
117Likes
