Senate votes to throw $886 billion into defense. How much money is wasted? – MishTalk

By an 88-11 margin, the Senate votes to spend $886 billion on defense spending. The details show a lot of graft that both parties seem happy with.

A proposal this week to modestly cut the already needlessly high and wasteful Pentagon budget failed miserably, says Responsible State in its grip Senate Bails Out the Weapon Industry Once again.

Press coverage of yesterday’s passage of the Senate version of the Pentagon’s annual spending bill, formally known as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), has focused primarily on the battle imminent because of the “culture war” provisions included in the House version of the bill. including measures that would limit the Pentagon’s ability to promote diversity, fight racism in the ranks, and promote reproductive freedom and LGBTQ rights.

Meanwhile, neither chamber did much to question the Pentagon’s increased budget, which could reach $1 trillion over the next few years if current trends continue. An amendment by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) that would have cut the Pentagon’s budget by 10 percent failed by an 88-11 vote, suggesting the vast majority of members are perfectly happy to throw in $886 billion of dollars to the Pentagon and Department of Energy (for nuclear weapons work), with few questions asked and few strings attached.

There are countless examples of contractors overcharging the Pentagon and ripping off the taxpayer. Senator Warren mentioned just a few at this week’s hearing: paying $1,500 for a medical device that could be purchased at Walmart for $192; giving Boeing $70 for a pin that was worth four cents; and paying $1,800 for vaccines that normally cost $125. And as 60 Minutes noted after interviewing former Pentagon procurement official Shay Assad, “[t]The Pentagon, he told us, overpays for almost everything, from radar and missiles…helicopters…planes…submarines…right down to the nuts and bolts.”

The Pentagon’s $52,000 trash can

Please consider The Pentathe $52,000 bin

Until 2010, Boeing charged an average of $300 for a trash can used in the E-3 Sentry, a surveillance and radar aircraft based on the civilian 707. When the 707 was phased out in the U.S. , the bin was no longer a “commercial” item, meaning Boeing was not obligated to maintain its price at previous levels, according to a weapons industry source who spoke to RS.

In 2020, the Pentagon paid Boeing more than $200,000 for four of the trash containers, which translated to about $51,606 per unit. In a 2021 contract, the company was charged $36,640 each for 11 dumpsters, bringing the total cost to more than $400,000. The apparent overcharge cost taxpayers an additional $600,000 between the two contracts.

In another case, Lockheed Martin increased the price of an electrical conduit for the P-3 aircraft by up to 14 times, costing the Pentagon an additional $133,000 between 2008 and 2015.

Jamaica Bearings, a company that distributes parts made by other companies, sold the Department of Defense 13 radio filters that had previously cost $350 each for nearly $49,000 per unit in 2022. The apparent markup cost taxpayers more than $600,000 dollars in additional expenses.

The investigation also revealed that Raytheon Technologies had raised the price of Stinger missiles from $25,000 to more than $400,000 per unit. “Even accounting for inflation and some improvements, that’s a sevenfold increase,” Shay Assad, a former Pentagon procurement official, told 60 Minutes.

About half of the Pentagon’s $842 billion budget request from the Biden administration goes to contractors. By 2022, roughly 30 percent of military spending went to the “big five” arms manufacturers, which include Raytheon, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman.

Pentagon price cut

Senator Warren talks frequently about price gouging and most of it is nonsense. When it comes to defense spending, he’s right to change.

Please play the following video from Responsible Statecraft. It’s a real eye opener.

More than the next 10 nations combined

The Peter G. Peterson Foundation focuses on defense spending The United States spends more on defense than the next 10 nations combined

Defense spending represents a significant portion of the federal budget, and the United States vastly outpaces other nations. To determine the appropriate level of this spending going forward, it will be important to assess whether it is being used effectively and how it fits in with other national priorities.

Support from all corners

Amazing reasons

Noah Smith: “Human extinction will require increased defense spending“.

Okay, that’s a sarcastic comment. But how the hell are we supposed to pay for it?

Deficit? Did you say deficit?

Please note Republicans want more military Spendingnegotiating the debt while reporting the deficit

Republican lawmakers who oppose the debt ceiling bill argue that it doesn’t do enough to reduce spending or reduce the deficit. However, when it comes to defense, many argue that the government should be spending more, not less.

Under the deal passed by the House late Wednesday and sent to the Senate, defense spending would get the 3.3 percent increase the president proposed for next year, even as other programs are cut. Defense hawks are pushing for an even bigger boost, and Sen. Lindsey Graham has proposed an amendment to the bill that would increase defense spending to keep up with inflation.

“When I hear Republican leaders say this budget deal fully funds defense, I laugh” the South Carolina Republican told reporters on Wednesday.

The administration’s $886.3 billion national security budget request for fiscal year 2024 provides the largest defense spending increase in history and also one of the largest peacetime budgets when adjusted for inflation. The US would spend more on defense than the next 10 countries combined.

The ongoing push for more military spending

Please consider The Permanent Push for more military spending includes submarines, missiles and now icebreakers.

Supposedly we have gaps in icebreakers, submarines, artificial intelligence, rapid defense experimentation, science and technology, nuclear submarines, NATO, China, missiles and
Space.

Republicans defend it as a job creation mechanism.

I’d rather spend money building infrastructure than fighting wars and wasting hundreds of billions of dollars stationing troops around the world.

But there is no choice. Democrats want Bidenomics and free money for social spending, and Republicans don’t mind wasting massive amounts of money on defense.

The inevitable consequence is the worst of both worlds, and in this case by a vote of 88-11.

By a margin of 100-0, they are all hypocrites about something.