|
Cutting spending on education is a loser. Politicians want to remain in office and anything a president wants to do regarding fixing the system will likely be shot down in Congress.
Cuts in the defense budget are considered a weakness due to the association of patriotism with global American police presence. Due to the degree by which global trade is interconnected, the likelihood of major war is extremely low. Most of our wars have been offensive, not defensive, and that means stratospheric costs of deployment and continued supply. If we were to take what we know, retract our tendrils and shut down most, if not all, foreign bases, and just act like a porcupine, no one would screw with us. Would we have to pay more for goods because we're no longer strong-arming governments or providing them with a "free" protector? Yes, but the savings in defense spending would likely make it a net zero.
We need to reform the entire political process of the United States, as we're currently operating a system designed for a population of 3 million, not 300+ million. It's fairly difficult to have a representative democratic republic when the representatives speak for so many and are so unduly influenced by unions and other employee blocs.
The President is a figurehead, one who should exude competence and logic- we have no one in the running who can claim to do such a thing.
|