Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
Significant and meaningful budget reduction involves slashing and burning defense contracts. And the Tea/Republican Party has declared the national defense to be sacrosanct, so I wouldn't worry about that happening. No, the F-35 does not need a second engine option. The only reason it was kept (until recently if memory serves) was that it happened to be manufactured in Speaker Bon...Boehner's district. (In other words, it's pork, until it benefits you/your people, in which case it's a "necessary national defense project".) Never mind the circa $600 billion spent annually on defense/homeland security with questionable results.
Significant and meaningful budget reduction also involves taking a good hard look at "mandatory" entitlement spending. Social Security is called the Third Rail for a reason: ye who touches it gets fried. Something has to be done to reduce what will be paid to future beneficiaries to keep the system solvent. Something has to be done to contain healthcare costs (the Feds buy a metric crap-ton healthcare in this country, including pharmaceuticals for which they can't bargain, by law!).
But $200 million from EAS. That'll fix it! Let's cut out NextGen too, that'll balance the budget. And reduce controller staffing! We don't need that
Let's abolish the Department of Education, too! Dem lazy teachers ar turkin' ar jarbz! (Massive )Note: None of this should be interpreted as advocating for a reduction in military force, or a reduction in pay/benefits for those currently serving. It should merely be interpreted as asking, "Do we really need that new weapons system/advanced imager to fight the War on Terror?"
