It's nothing but a form of corporate welfare.

Non-discretionary would include payments on the national debt, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and certain federal pensions.

Oh, here it is:

I believe. Not sure about the vet benefits and food and ag portion.

We, not so much.

and don't have any children.

nuclear war will wipe out humanity.

The 20,000,000 megaton Toba supervolcano didn't do it (that's 2,000x the entire nuclear arsenal. I know they would be more dispersed but still).

and if you do survive, your children will be born weird looking.

entity. Yeah supervolcanoes don't release radioactivity, just means they release even more heat and shock (also, for large nuclear weapons, heat and shock are much more significant than ionizing radiation).

And you mock the energy of it, but it's true. The Toba supervolcano was 2000x stronger than the world's entire nuclear arsenal - that's put ALL the world's nukes in a big pile and blow them up. Do that again tomorrow. And the next day. And the next day after that. Do that every day for over 5 years. And humanity still survived.

10,000 fukushimas will do what to the biosphere?

humanity unless we get hit with another double whammy right after (ie supervolcano or impact event)

about the military industrial complex, we failed to prevent it and the country fell all over itself over Ronald Reagan's acting like a president and CIC and it ballooned from that point on into the monstrosity it is today.

of our current Democrats. I remember when I was very, very young hearing my father COMPLAIN about Eisenhower because he was as REPUBLICAN! I was raised as an Army brat and it's one of the things I have never been able to forget! He was a Democrat then and I've been pone since!

Probably won't be soon!

Instead of when he had, I dunno, a bully pulpit or something.

shadow money spent we no very little of.

I found the source of the chart, and there are a lot of interesting charts at this site.

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2015/presidents-2016-budget-in-pictures/

I've not heard of that site before, so I can't vouch for it personally. Anyone know anything about NationalPriorities.org?

A quick google search got me these 3 links, all of which say that the site was created by the National Priorities Project. It is a national, non-profit, non-partisan research organization.

Wikipedia
Boston Globe
About National Priorities

For the purpose of honesty, I have to point out that the OP's chart shows Discretionary Spending, not the total budget, which is closer to $3.8 trillion. Military spending is only 15.88% of the overall budget, at $609.3 billion (Federal Spending).
Of course this is still a ridiculous amount, especially considering that free college tuition for the nation would cost about $60 billion, only 10% of the military budget.

(Edit) On the second scan through the replies I found out another DUer beat me to pointing out discretionary spending. Sorry about the duplicate point.

it is disgusting.

Some basic needs would be a good start.

Nice things like new more modern aircraft carriers. Maybe we could even start building battleships again.

employment program. We'll pay you to risk your butt pounding sand. Then you can send money home to your family, hope you make it back alive and reasonably intact physically and psychologically. And good luck getting a job when you get back.

getting the healthcare you need after being in that sand. And I'm not talking about throwing pills at people. All the suicides? Who might be taking the time to counsel these people with PTSD? The VA is not impressing me.

in harm's way. Proudly anti-war since the 70s in Nixon's alma mater. Hung in effigy...quite an emotional time. One friend did not get back alive.

in at least two too many wars that had no reason, I am anti-war to the max. That is probably my biggest issue with anyone.

yep


peace to you sister,
kp

Long time on here. Thank you as always for your sanity.

They certainly aren't perfect, and probably even less so than other govt agencies just because they get vast sums of unchecked money and have no oversight of what they do with it all. If the Republicans treated the military with the same zealous supervision as they apply to the EPA, the military would by reduced to a bi-plane, a rowboat, and three guys with BB guns.

So far, the DOD's book are so tricked up, no one seems able to audit the department...

funny that

makes the gutless feel attached to something strong.

can't provide the services to our veterans that they were promised. Leaving to many veterans with staggering health care issues that they ignore, along side homelessness, and unemployment.

Food and agriculture, educations expenditures-this is not acceptable!

F35

The program is the most expensive military weapons system in history, and it has been the object of much criticism from those inside and outside government—in the US and in allied countries.[20] Critics argue that the plane is "plagued with design flaws," with many blaming the procurement process in which Lockheed was allowed "to design, test, and produce the F-35 all at the same time, instead of ... [identifying and fixing] defects before firing up its production line."[20] By 2014, the program was "$163 billion over budget [and] seven years behind schedule."[21] Critics further contend that the program's high sunk costs and political momentum make it "too big to kill."[22]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II




Vermont/ Sanders

Bernie Sanders Doubles Down on F-35 Support Days After Runway Explosion

By Carl Gibson, Reader Supported News

03 June 14

Me: “You mentioned wasteful military spending. The other day ... I’m sure you’ve heard about the F-35 catching fire on the runway. The estimated lifetime expense of the F-35 is $1.2 trillion. When you talk about cutting wasteful military spending, does that include the F-35 program?”

Bernie Sanders: “No, and I’ll tell you why – it is essentially built. It is the airplane of the United States Air Force, Navy, and of NATO. It was a very controversial issue in Vermont. And my view was that given the fact that the F-35, which, by the way, has been incredibly wasteful, that’s a good question. But for better or worse, that is the plane of record right now, and it is not gonna be discarded. That’s the reality.”

snip

The Lockheed Martin F-35 is the epitome of Pentagon waste. The program has already cost taxpayers roughly half a trillion dollars, with $700 billion or more to come during the program’s lifetime. During an interview, Pierre Sprey, a co-designer of the F-16, went into great detail about how the F-35 was a lemon aircraft. Sprey explained that the fighter is an excessively heavy gas guzzler with small wings, a low bomb-carry capacity, low loiter time, is incapable of slow flight, is detectable to World War II-era low-frequency radar, and costs $200 million apiece. And just a little over a week ago, the F-35 caught fire on a runway at Eglin Air Force Base.

To his credit, Sanders acknowledged that the program was “wasteful” in his defense of it. The contention over the F-35 in his home state of Vermont is that the program is now responsible for jobs in his hometown of Burlington, where he served as mayor before running for Congress. Some front doors of homes in the Burlington area are adorned with green ribbons, signifying support for the F-35. Sanders, like his colleagues in 45 states around the country, doesn’t want to risk the wrath of voters angry about job losses related to F-35 manufacturing, assembly, and training if the program were to be cut. And that’s where Lockheed Martin’s political savvy comes into play.

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/24583-bernie-sanders-doubles-down-on-f-35-support-days-after-runway-explosion

So, it is all about jobs for HIS state and screwing the the tax payers in the rest of the country. Nice.

as jobs to be handed out to the states who need or want them. It is the obscene profits that lure in almost all politicians...who would be voted out if they did not take the money/jobs.

I'm not making it any better for Bernie, but it's a national problem...jobs....and the military has a number of ways to get that money to return the jobs. It's an unholy alliance. Remember Dwight D. Eisenhower...I can't quote it, but he said way back then that this MIC would lead to what we have.

This is disingenuous and a crass political attack. Many who abhor war have been complicit in enabling the MIC. It's how it's structured.

Go figure.

which seem to be delayed or non-existent.

and brain washes our youth. Those few who go to war get a licence to kill, return with PTSD and end up suiciding because they cant face what they did, nor fit into society. Others become assassins for hire as militants for hire, such as our police force or Homeland Security contractors

The real money is in the arms supply and other defense industries. They lobby Congress well and with defense contracts controlled by Congress being doled out to contractors in - just a guess here - 435 or so Congressional districts, it is a jobs program. The actual troops are just a necessary expense, as is war, to feed the beast.

target military families, etc., I think the answer is yes, our military personal are treated as throwaways.

I never served nor pro-military, but my father and some of his siblings did. Some were voluntary during WWII, my father volunteered during the Cold War (never, ever close to danger and enjoyed his time in Europe, a great adventure for a small town kid with limited options at home). I was lucky to have come of age post draft, with a choice. I never really considered the military, but have friends who did (some out of a sense of obligation/duty, some because of the poor economy we graduated into from high school, some for the chance for some adventure).

I hate how our government on one hand praises and glorifies our soldiers and sailors and marines while on the other hand don't keep up our end of the bargain to those who do serve. Most of all, I hate how and where they make them serve.

Dear Kpete:

This is the most important post of the entire election. This is why we are not getting the benefits that we are all paying for. With Hillary we will have war and more war. This chart is the elephant in the livingroom of our country. No one is talking about it. Foreign policy and our bloated military budget are not common topics. A lot of people figure we need it everytime they start up the fear machine.

I tried to explain this to someone who was quite good at referencing "the budget", and I think it's purposely not as available.

Thanks.

enabled our service people's lives and deaths in other wars of convenience, and is still The Hawk of the Democratic Party ready to proceed in other war theaters.

Others are forced to support the troops pounding sand. Surely we cannot forget them. But also, to provide them...at the very least...support for themselves and their families if and when they return.

No more wars for Empire. That is the position I take and vote for NOW.

if it DID, it would not appreciate the significance.



How Hillary Clinton Became a Hawk

Throughout her career she has displayed instincts
on foreign policy that are more aggressive than
those of President Obama — and most Democrats.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/magazine/how-hillary-clinton-became-a-hawk.html?

more than

This chart shows our craven priorities.

I have never, ever felt like I belonged or could support such a system. I have worked against it all of my adult years.

Cher

Sick in so many ways. This election has demonstrated for all the world that we can no longer even do basic democracy. Basic education and reasonably priced heath care are out of the question.

But......................(in case you forgot)

seldom a problem to those interested in an honest discussion based on facts. People need to realize the military budget covers more than ground pounders.

The DOD employs some 700K civilian and 600K contract employees.

https://www.afge.org/index.cfm?ContentID=6288


You want real wailing and moaning? Try cutting them ladies and gentlemen and see what happens. BtRAC? Oh yeah! That can turn out mobs of people in a hurry.

lot of lining the pockets of CEOs of BigPharma and Insurance companies.

What could be done with even half of that 57%.

Sure does put the lie to that Home of the Brave bullshit we've been spoonfed for the last 50 years. If we're so brave as a nation, why does our budget make us look like we're the biggest cowards ever? Paying obscene amounts of money on the military because our politicians are gutless tools who try to compensate for their cowardice by making the US the bully of the world. That line should be removed from the National Anthem.

since December 7, 1941.

would spark a national conversation about how much we spend on the military vs other countries and the benefits that those citizens have because they don't spend so much on defense. Also the benefits people in other countries receive from "our" corporations because their governments require it (health care, vacation) from McDonald's, for example. Many of these benefits (40 hr workweek, etc.) were started here due to the actions and bravery of workers long ago. I continue to hope that if those benefits were widely known, Americans might rise up and finally demand these things. What is wrong with us?!

in getting Americans to dream and question, "Why not us?"

FUCK war and our bloated Pentagon killing machine.

Obama has hollowed out our once great military. We need someone like Chris to up the paltry percentage spent on the military to something more reasonable like 90 percent. It would be easy to do. Just cut out the useless stuff like education, health, housing and community, energy and environment and science. Hey, there might even be enough money left over to start a department of religion, end all corporate tax, build a few hundred new prisons, and cut the outrageous 17 percent income tax (down to a more reasonable 3 percent) that the top one percent of earners are now forced to pay.

". . it risks conservatives responding with this chart."

"This chart" that you offer uses phony accounting - and I know that
conservatives do use it. But we do not have to, nor should we.

And in fact, all the charts cited above contain major errors that reflect
the lies of the militarists.

Just to begin with the most obvious phony accounting trick, does it
make any sense at all to count "Veterans' Benefits" as non-military spending?

Answer: No, it does not.

Similarly, the construction and testing of nuclear weapons is considered
spending on "energy." What a sick joke that is.

Real US military spending is close to $ 1.2 TRILLION PER YEAR

You are being lied to . .

Would be an honest discussion of the real numbers.

Sadly it is so complex we are reduced to these manipulated graphs that in the end only serve as a way for both sides to point their fingers and call the other liars.

Better than nothing I guess but I suspect not very helpful in the end.

Also, why did you reply this to the OP?

Anyways: your nuclear numbers are just as "dishonest" since that includes civilian research and programs. Personally breaking it along the department lines makes a lot of sense to me

sorry if my tone was snippy. That was not my intent.

But I do think that $ spent on security should be properly
accounted for; and that is not the case at this time.

Per Wiki, here is an outline of "insecurity" spending that almost always
conveniently gets left out . .

"This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance, cleanup, and production, which are in the Atomic Energy Defense Activities section,[16] Veterans Affairs, the Treasury Department's payments in pensions to military retirees and widows and their families, interest on debt incurred in past wars, or State Department financing of foreign arms sales and militarily-related development assistance. Neither does it include defense spending that is not military in nature, such as the Department of Homeland Security, counter-terrorism spending by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and intelligence-gathering spending by NSA."

Not to mention state and local "security" spending

Then they need to take about 25% of that and move it over th VETERANs' BENEFITS....should be 5% on War 50% on Vets!!!!

I like to see the overall budget not just discretionary spending. I want the whole picture. I agree we spend WAY TOO MUCH on Military, but I also like to see where the rest goes too.

like a functioning economy.

Money gets poured down that 5 sided black hole in Arlington so the rich can sleep soundly.

would probably be ok with it. The propaganda has been pretty effective.

Same numbers can be selected in so many different ways, but none of them looks good for USA - unless you like full focus on military solutions. With numbers based on NATO sources, the five biggest military spenders in 2015 were the USA, China, Saudi Arabia, Russia and the UK. USA used 596 billion dollars and Russia 66 billion dollars - that is nine times less, not including the rest of NATO.

For Defence expenditures as a percentage of gross domestic product from the last eight years, we could be happy that it has fallen from 4.7 to 3.4. Or sad, that it is still so high compared to others like Denmark with three times lower spending. Those numbers looks worse as Defence expenditures per capita, which for United States is between 1900 to 2500 dollars - the Danish numbers again three times lower.

USA is pushing Denmark for higher military spending, and with the Danish decision to buy F-35, it will happen. My hope is that these fighter jets will rust on the ground, when their too complex systems are broken down. So much of the military spending is fixed into these mistakes, so nobody in NATO could then afford more costly wars - and we can finally have some peaceful solutions.