Option 3 is a long shot because it all depends if Ron Paul can win office. If our defense budget was cut in half or more, the currency could possibly bounce back in theory. This would call for most of the troops and contractors being pulled out of the Middle East though. So like I said, it's a long shot, but it's the only shot we have left.
Ah... You're a Paulite. Explains a lot!
Don't believe those liars running for office. Social security, Medicare, etc is a drop in the bucket compared to nation building costs. I think paying off half the debt would be possibly in 4 years in theory if they follow Paul's plan.
Sigh... Debate trick #5. When stating something that is completely false, always precede it with a statement about how those who say differently are liars.
Your statement is wrong. It's not just wrong, it's completely 180 degrees the wrong direction wrong. In 2010, the total defense budget was $689B. Social Security alone was $700B. Medicare was $520B. Medicaid was $272B. "Income Security" (welfare basically) was $437B.
The totals for social spending just in those areas adds up to $1929B. Total Defense spending is less than 1/3rd of what we spend on the social stuff. Oh... And that's only counting the non-discretionary spending. We also have Domestic Discretionary spending, which amounts to $614B. Now, to be fair, a small amount of that falls into the category you might call "defense" (domestic defense stuff, some research, maybe some national guard spending, etc). But an overwhelming amount of dollars in that domestic spending category also falls into social spending or infrastructure categories. I don't count that normally because some of that is worth doing and some of it isn't.
The point is that we only need to look at Social Security to see that you're wrong. The other stuff just makes you that much more wrong. Sadly, if history is any indicator, in a week you'll have conveniently forgotten this and still be insisting that defense is the number one expense our Federal government has.