Economics perspective example video: Manufacturing jobs have become more specialized requiring less labor and more technical expertise.
Pointless expenditures: $1.2 trillion for an outdated plan that doesn't work! = "In fact, the entire $1.2 trillion dollars that the sequester is supposed to save could be realized by cutting one unneeded, wasteful boondoggle: the $1.5 trillion F-35 fighter program. The F-35, billed as the next generation all-purpose military fighter and bomber, has been an unmitigated disaster. Its performances in recent tests have been so bad that the Pentagon has been forced to dumb-down the criteria. It is overweight, overpriced, and unwieldy. It is also an anachronism: we no longer face the real prospect of air-to-air combat in this era of 4th generation warfare. The World War II mid-air dogfight era is long over" http://the-free-foundation.org/tst3-3-2013.html
Video: Senator Bernie Sanders also thinks sending manufacturing jobs abroad is bad economic policy (as he argues here against Alan Greenspan)
Ron Paul Video: There are "900 bases in 150 countries"
From The Economist: Indeed, the one lesson that can be drawn from the data is that today's strategic priorities can shape deployments for decades to come, long after the original reason for putting G.I.s in a particular region has gone.
On Paul Ryan's "Plan":
Paul Ryan Finally Meets a Budget Cut He Hates Paul Ryan is a budget hawk's budget hawk, never one to believe a government bureaucrat who self-servingly claims that a spending cut will cause real damage to his program and the people it benefits. But there are exceptions:
House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) expressed skepticism Thursday that U.S. military leaders were being honest in their budget requests to Congress. “We don’t think the generals are giving us their true advice,” Ryan said during a forum on the budget sponsored by the National Journal. "We don't think the generals believe their budget is really the right budget."
"You don't believe the generals?" [managing editor Kristin] Roberts asked.
"What I believe is this budget does hollow out defense," Ryan responded...."I think there’s a lot of budget smoke and mirrors in the Pentagon’s budget," Ryan added, saying his proposal was an "honest Pentagon budget." Just to be absolutely clear here: if we're talking about a program that helps the poor or the elderly or the sick, Ryan is eager to cut spending. In fact, he's usually eager to be the biggest budget cutter in the room. But if it's a program for the military, he won't accept spending cuts even if the military brass supports them. In fact, he insists on raising their budget. For some reason, this is known in mainstream circles as being a "deficit hawk."
i.e. What Paul Ryan is doing is taking a sledgehammer to everything not involved with bombing others - i.e. Conservatives Seem To Like Only Two Options: War Or Austerity!