21–30 of 191 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The eagerness to kill Stars and Stripes is hard to fathom. As the senators note in their letter to Esper, the $15.5 million saved by eliminating the newspaper’s subsidy would have a “negligible impact” on the Pentagon’s $700 billion budget."
I'm OK with cutting $15.5 million from the military budget. Sure, it's a drop in the ocean, but any savings we can wring out of the military is a good thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The eagerness to kill Stars and Stripes is hard to fathom. As the senators note in their letter to Esper, the $15.5 million saved by eliminating the newspaper’s subsidy would have a “negligible impact” on the Pentagon’s $700 billion budget."
I'm OK with cutting $15.5 million from the military budget. Sure, it's a drop in the ocean, but any savings we can wring out of the military is a good thing.
Never heard of "firemen first"? That's what this sounds like. Whenever there's a budget fight, there's brinkmanship, and this is a common tactic. Government, industry - it doesn't matter. Respond to cuts or proposed cuts by putting something on the cut pile that is unacceptable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm OK with cutting $15.5 million from the military budget. Sure, it's a drop in the ocean, but any savings we can wring out of the military is a good thing.
Not with you on that one. Soldiers and their families are, were rather, represented in print. Not any more. What's that worth?
It seems there's a very simple reason. https://www.stripes.com/news/us/trump-denies-reports-that-he... A few days ago they also ran a story about a poll showing Trump lagging Biden among the military.
Which is the last the thing current administration wants anyone to be able to do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm OK with cutting $15.5 million from the military budget. Sure, it's a drop in the ocean, but any savings we can wring out of the military is a good thing.
Not with you on that one. Soldiers and their families are, were rather, represented in print. Not any more. What's that worth?
Never heard of "firemen first"? That's what this sounds like. Whenever there's a budget fight, there's brinkmanship, and this is a common tactic. Government, industry - it doesn't matter. Respond to cuts or proposed cuts by putting something on the cut pile that is unacceptable.
It's not. This administration has increased the defense budget by $200 billion, cumulatively.
This is a second-derivative tactic; it can be employed even if the first-derivative is positive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm OK with cutting $15.5 million from the military budget. Sure, it's a drop in the ocean, but any savings we can wring out of the military is a good thing.
I agree with the sentiment, but there are legitimate changes in purchasing/budgeting that could _actually_ impact the budget ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-end-of-t... ). Better reporting on egregious kickbacks like this might lead to more repercussions for the Congresspeople in question, that'd be one of the best ways to trim the fat on the Pentagon budget.