PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
there are probably lots of words the military doesn't use.......doesn't change the fact they are hired, though.....
U.S. military spending: increase by ~10%? By cutting what spending elsewhere?
- Thread starter sear
- Start date
there are probably lots of words the military doesn't use.......doesn't change the fact they are hired, though.....
"For instance salary is 25% ish of the budget. One american soldier costs as much as 10 or 20 chinese ones so for the same amount of money they get 20x the manpower." t #102
It's vastly less expensive to billet our troops Stateside.
I don't know how the " costs as much as 10 or 20 chinese ones " approximation was arrived at. But we should bear in mind, China's military occupation may be limited mainly to Tibet, and perhaps the islands it's dredging up in the South China Sea.
The other consideration is, our perhaps more high-tech equipment is a force-multiplier.
So even if China has a ~15:1 troop ratio advantage over U.S., that doesn't mean they'd have the advantage on the battle field.
Finally: what battlefield? I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep about Chinese troops marching into Peoria.
It's China's navy that seems to be the more immediate concern. And the U.S. Navy seems fairly well appointed.
The U.S. is reportedly paying about $1 $Million per troop per year in Afghanistan.
It's vastly less expensive to billet our troops Stateside.
I don't know how the " costs as much as 10 or 20 chinese ones " approximation was arrived at. But we should bear in mind, China's military occupation may be limited mainly to Tibet, and perhaps the islands it's dredging up in the South China Sea.
The other consideration is, our perhaps more high-tech equipment is a force-multiplier.
So even if China has a ~15:1 troop ratio advantage over U.S., that doesn't mean they'd have the advantage on the battle field.
Finally: what battlefield? I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep about Chinese troops marching into Peoria.
It's China's navy that seems to be the more immediate concern. And the U.S. Navy seems fairly well appointed.
the ratio is gotten from their salary. Chinese workers are paid much less than their american counterparts. Which is why were having the whole discussion on outsourcing.
fyi it would also cost the chinese much less to billet troops in china due to the cost of living there.
Cancel 2018.1
New member
Why not just cut out the cost of all the salaries ,supplies, retirement, and support and simply give half that money to local gubmints . It'd be far cheaper.
Excess military is nothing more than very expensive welfare.
wut. your seriously advocating for halving all the salaries of the soldiers? They may actually mutiny.
in reagans time the US doctrine was win 2. Win 2 major wars at once against 2 major powers (ie russia and china) during Clintons time due to budget cuts it was win 1 hold 1. Win 1 war and hold the other in a stalemate. In w time it was something like be able to be in 4 deployments at once winning one. I dunno about obama but the standard is getting lower and lower.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
It's a warped priority for a guy who wants to decrease the debt.
What threats do we have? Why do we need some kind of cold war budget?
Terrorism is the biggest threat, and that's intel. Trump's a mess.
What threats do we have? Why do we need some kind of cold war budget?
Terrorism is the biggest threat, and that's intel. Trump's a mess.
china and russia? Newhoo in the win 2 doctrine we had 3 million active + reserves. win 1 hold 1 2.1 million active and reserves. That's a million more employed people.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
the genius of the military industrial complex is that every single district in the US has a base so congress cant do much about it.
I don't even care about that. do we really need to "win 2 land wars?"-it's a nice luxury,but that's a LOT of manpower.
Instead/..work towards a stable force ..none of this constant adding and subtracting to personnel-
when we do that we lose good people from the military to the private sector. That's what leaves us vulnerable-
we need a stable officer corps with normal attrition
Of course the various weapons systems need to have secure funding too.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Yet you wonder why you have a well deserved reputation on JPP for being a stubborn arsehole. You can't bullshit your way out of this, for once in your life admit you were wrong and move on.
Sent from Lenovo K5 Note:
To piss off snowflakes, bottom feeders and racists
That social welfare spending is even .0000001% of the budget is sickening.
Since the military is one of the few things for which the federal government has delegated authority, if you don't like the percentages, tough shit.
Cancel 2018.1
New member
No. Advocating cutting 100% the salaries of, e.g., 10% of soldiers. The laziest ones. Then maybe they'd quit.
Ever seen a worthless, lazy, POS soldier that does just enough to not get kicked out? I've seen many.
Cancel 2018.1
New member
The only war I remember in Reagan's time was the famous Grenada War fought over protecting American medical students. That one should be added to the Marine Corps Battle Hymn.
I think we won that one decisively.
"cutting 100% the salaries of, e.g., 10% of soldiers. The laziest ones. Then maybe they'd quit." #115
The following axiom is not confined to the military:
Employees do just barely enough to avoid being fired.
Employers pay just barely enough to prevent employees from quitting.
Any commercial organization of any size might love to get rid of the 10% least productive among them.
The problem is, finding which individuals that is may be easier said than done.
An employee that's obviously "busy" from the start of the shift to the end of shift may simply not be as efficient as his co-worker that's a much better multi-tasker.
The following axiom is not confined to the military:
Employees do just barely enough to avoid being fired.
Employers pay just barely enough to prevent employees from quitting.
Any commercial organization of any size might love to get rid of the 10% least productive among them.
The problem is, finding which individuals that is may be easier said than done.
An employee that's obviously "busy" from the start of the shift to the end of shift may simply not be as efficient as his co-worker that's a much better multi-tasker.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
cancel2 2022
Canceled
They faced some severe opposition, the locals started throwing pineapples at them.
Sent from Lenovo K5 Note:
To piss off snowflakes, bottom feeders and racists
Reagan's attitude was build it unquestionably stronger than any other military in the world, hope you never have to use it in that manner, but kick ass if you do.