Stop the Madness!

[Jarlaxle]

How about an across-the-board 15% cut in ALL federal spending?

I know, it will NEVER work.

Too many oxen being gored.

No way. Twice that much, MINIMUM, and probably more. Start with 30% cuts for all non-military programs and 50% for all military programs. Keep slashing from there.

[Andrew D]

Otherwise, it will be obsolete by the time it takes its first flight.

Like the F-22, which took fourteen years to produce, more than doubled in cost during that time, and served no useful purpose by the time the Air Force actually got it.

The actual profitability of major defense weapons providers has never been good.

In the real world, defense contractors make huge profits:

The last ten years have seen massive growth in defense industry profits. In 2002, the combined profits of the five largest U.S.-based defense contractors were $2.4 billion (adjusted for inflation); by 2011, that figure had increased by a whopping 450 percent to $13.4 billion (according to net Income TTM data from ycharts.com for five largest U.S.-based defense contractors).

Facts:

Rank, Company, Profit Margin Quarterly
1 Innovative Solutions and Support 40.03%
2 Transdigm Group 18.99%
3 FLIR Systems 16.83%
4 Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation 15.51%
5 Sturm Ruger & Company 14.68%
6 CPI Aerostructures 13.86%
7 TASER International 12.78%
8 Rockwell Collins 12.43%
9 Esterline Technologies Corporation 11.62%
10 AeroVironment 10.88%

Claiming that defense contracting is not a hugely profitable industry is just silly and uninformed.

[Andrew D]

Everyone is in favor of better government ....

Really? The members of Congress who vote to force on the military weapons programs which the military says it does not need or want are in favor of better government?

Better for whom?

And that is the essential question: Who benefits?

The American people? Or the people who fatten themselves at the taxpayers' expense?

[Gob]

The US defence department says it has begun laying off most of its 46,000 temporary employees, as automatic defence budget cuts loom in March.

Deputy Defence Secretary Ashton Carter said the Pentagon was acting "because we're running out of time" to absorb potential changes to their budget.

$50bn (£32bn) in cuts are due this year under the so-called fiscal cliff.

Lawmakers made a last-minute deal on 1 January to put them off for two months, but the ultimate outcome is undecided.

Mr Carter said he was directing each military service to produce detailed plans by 1 February on reducing short-term spending.

He also said the Pentagon could force its 800,000 civilian employees to lose one day of work per week without pay from April, in a move that would save $5bn.

The Pentagon and other parts of the US government face across-the-board cuts on 1 March, with an estimated $500bn decrease in the defence budget over 10 years.

The US defence department unveiled a strategy in early 2012 designed to accommodate at least $450bn in Pentagon cuts over the next decade, as the country winds down the Afghanistan war.

The automatic reductions due in March would be in addition to these savings.

[oldr_n_wsr]

He also said the Pentagon could force its 800,000 civilian employees to lose one day of work per week without pay from April, in a move that would save $5bn.

The math don't add up.
800,000 people each losing 4 days means 3200000 man days will save $5billion. That means that each man day costs 5,000,000,000/3200000 = $1562.5 ???

Anyone you know making even close to that per day?
that's over $400K per year
Unless I computed wrong.

[Scooter]

Not sure where you are getting that they are losing only four days. If they are losing one day of work per week from April, I am assuming to the end of the fiscal year (September), that is 26 days, which would be $240/day, which sounds reasonable.

[oldr_n_wsr]

I am assuming to the end of the fiscal year (September),

Not stated in the article, but if so, then yours is a more reasonable number.
thanks