Sentences with phrase «defense spending did»

As you can see in the graph below, leading up to and following the collapse of the Soviet Union defense spending did indeed begin to drop, however the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the following wars in Iraq and Afghanistan reversed the trend.

Not exact matches

Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in such forward - looking statements and that should be considered in evaluating our outlook include, but are not limited to, the following: 1) our ability to continue to grow our business and execute our growth strategy, including the timing, execution, and profitability of new and maturing programs; 2) our ability to perform our obligations under our new and maturing commercial, business aircraft, and military development programs, and the related recurring production; 3) our ability to accurately estimate and manage performance, cost, and revenue under our contracts, including our ability to achieve certain cost reductions with respect to the B787 program; 4) margin pressures and the potential for additional forward losses on new and maturing programs; 5) our ability to accommodate, and the cost of accommodating, announced increases in the build rates of certain aircraft; 6) the effect on aircraft demand and build rates of changing customer preferences for business aircraft, including the effect of global economic conditions on the business aircraft market and expanding conflicts or political unrest in the Middle East or Asia; 7) customer cancellations or deferrals as a result of global economic uncertainty or otherwise; 8) the effect of economic conditions in the industries and markets in which we operate in the U.S. and globally and any changes therein, including fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates; 9) the success and timely execution of key milestones such as the receipt of necessary regulatory approvals, including our ability to obtain in a timely fashion any required regulatory or other third party approvals for the consummation of our announced acquisition of Asco, and customer adherence to their announced schedules; 10) our ability to successfully negotiate, or re-negotiate, future pricing under our supply agreements with Boeing and our other customers; 11) our ability to enter into profitable supply arrangements with additional customers; 12) the ability of all parties to satisfy their performance requirements under existing supply contracts with our two major customers, Boeing and Airbus, and other customers, and the risk of nonpayment by such customers; 13) any adverse impact on Boeing's and Airbus» production of aircraft resulting from cancellations, deferrals, or reduced orders by their customers or from labor disputes, domestic or international hostilities, or acts of terrorism; 14) any adverse impact on the demand for air travel or our operations from the outbreak of diseases or epidemic or pandemic outbreaks; 15) our ability to avoid or recover from cyber-based or other security attacks, information technology failures, or other disruptions; 16) returns on pension plan assets and the impact of future discount rate changes on pension obligations; 17) our ability to borrow additional funds or refinance debt, including our ability to obtain the debt to finance the purchase price for our announced acquisition of Asco on favorable terms or at all; 18) competition from commercial aerospace original equipment manufacturers and other aerostructures suppliers; 19) the effect of governmental laws, such as U.S. export control laws and U.S. and foreign anti-bribery laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the United Kingdom Bribery Act, and environmental laws and agency regulations, both in the U.S. and abroad; 20) the effect of changes in tax law, such as the effect of The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the «TCJA») that was enacted on December 22, 2017, and changes to the interpretations of or guidance related thereto, and the Company's ability to accurately calculate and estimate the effect of such changes; 21) any reduction in our credit ratings; 22) our dependence on our suppliers, as well as the cost and availability of raw materials and purchased components; 23) our ability to recruit and retain a critical mass of highly - skilled employees and our relationships with the unions representing many of our employees; 24) spending by the U.S. and other governments on defense; 25) the possibility that our cash flows and our credit facility may not be adequate for our additional capital needs or for payment of interest on, and principal of, our indebtedness; 26) our exposure under our revolving credit facility to higher interest payments should interest rates increase substantially; 27) the effectiveness of any interest rate hedging programs; 28) the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting; 29) the outcome or impact of ongoing or future litigation, claims, and regulatory actions; 30) exposure to potential product liability and warranty claims; 31) our ability to effectively assess, manage and integrate acquisitions that we pursue, including our ability to successfully integrate the Asco business and generate synergies and other cost savings; 32) our ability to consummate our announced acquisition of Asco in a timely matter while avoiding any unexpected costs, charges, expenses, adverse changes to business relationships and other business disruptions for ourselves and Asco as a result of the acquisition; 33) our ability to continue selling certain receivables through our supplier financing program; 34) the risks of doing business internationally, including fluctuations in foreign current exchange rates, impositions of tariffs or embargoes, compliance with foreign laws, and domestic and foreign government policies; and 35) our ability to complete the proposed accelerated stock repurchase plan, among other things.

When Trump said, «Look, if NATO allies don't want to spend the 2 percent on defense, why should Americans be doing it?»

... you did know that Americans now spend more on drugs known to cause brain damage than they do on nationaal defense, did you not?

If Romney gets elected and he does not touch defense spending and cuts radically in other areas, not good.

Some folks don't believe in defense spending and war as government - mandated programs either — and in protest have withheld tax money owed to the IRS — and I don't recall them winning their cases.

I'll go a step further if Van Djik hasn't signed for Liverpool I would try to make a move and here is why: 1) Prem experience 2) Southampton plays a similar style of football than Arsenal 3) He can play in both a 3 and 4 man defense with his ability on the ball 4) Mustafi has been up and down and I don't know which one we're getting ahead of next season and will it be for 38 weeks 5) Mertesacker will go into a non playing role 6) Chambers has played well at Boro but well enough to play a big role into this team... not really and could be used in any deal for Van Djik 7) Koscielny is our best defenders but is dealing with a chronic injury not only that he hasn't made the best decisions at times Everything mentioned above will free wages but also increase Wenger money to spend!

it seems obvious, theo is gone, he is tough on negotiation and demands and soft on delivering value, i like him, but if we sell and spend i am ok, as for danny, i thought he looked great v new castle, he was constantly stretching the defense, his track back was also great, heart and speed are there, takes a wenger to work on making him clinical, thats what arsene does best, teach.

I don't see Wenger spending on defense in January (if he spends anything at all).

I hope Wenger (if he doesn't get fired) thinks before spending big money on defense and midfield.

Liverpool — Henderson — Gerrard Real — Modric — Kroos Don't get me wrong, we absolutely need a pure DM for tough matches — but spending 25M + + for extra depth in that position is really luxury Vidal is a versatile all around central midfielder — If we play 4 -2-3-1, let him pair with either Ramsey / Carzola and we have a very strong midfield base in both attack and defense.

There is no likelihood that Patterson's British invasion will result in a defense there this June, as seemed likely before the tarnished British champion, Joe Erskine, lost to the European champion, Ingemar Johansson, who doesn't want to fight Patterson until he has spent time in the United States studying how we do it.

i bet his defense will be that he thought that whole bus was full of Khabib's teammates and that he didn't know other fighters were in the bus...... after all the sh & % $ it UFC went thru to get MMA legal in N.Y., not to mention $ $ $ $ $ they spend on lobbying, and this moron does this, which will get ammunition to all «MMA haters» politician in N.Y.............

He has also been very stingy in defense and doesn't believe in DM He is attacking minded and never spends big on DMs He inherited Viera and never replaced him or spent big to get a DM We are lucky to have coquelin Last summer I was bigging for Kondogbia, Schneidelin, Krychowiak, Carvahlo Xhaka isn't a dedicated DM but hopefully his defensive skills will make up for that

he is playing back a bit further than a traditional 4 -3-3, but he has a 3 man defense behind him so he doesn't have to spend so much time focusing on defending and can use that time to win balls in the midfield and push forward.

In addition, in the event the criminal case went to trial, one of the defense attorneys would have spent a little time on the plaintiff being in a bar at age 18, «Tell me, miss, how did you get into the bar?

Wenger doesn't know how to win the PL He inherited many of the players in late 90's He didn't build our legendary brick walll of a defense That's why we havent had one since they broke up We didn't even adequately replace Viera (who again Wenger inheited) Coquelin came from our academy like Bellerin (very few top players come from Academy) And Coquelin isn't good enough Wenger will NOT spend big on a Defensive Midfielder

Arsenal is richer than Liverpool n totenham but why and how did they spend more in the summer n we did not fill in our potholes in the defense, im having too much thoughts these days, watching arsenal becoming more mediocre than ever

If mom is spending money you don't have on baby clothes, a budget in black and white may be your best line of fiscal defense.

Given that France, Germany and the UK have larger economies than Russia does, why do they spend less on defense than Russia does, yet always seem to be scared of Russia?

And this Al - Monitor (a media site focused on Middle East which was accused of following «the agenda of the Iranian and Syrian governments and Hezbollah») article details a bit more the military budget and the growing trend of Iran's military spendings, although it does not state the current total defense budget and its numbers are considerably lower than SIPRI's for the past years, maybe because the fiscal year used in this article begins near 20th March:

In addition, one must take into account the large economic footprint of the private defense industry from companies like Lockheed Martin and Boeing who are dependent on the military for contracts to keep them going, as well as the kind of industries that one doesn't think of when they think of military spending and dependence on the military like food service contracts or transportation spending.

Why do most NATO members fail to spend the agreed target of 2 % of GDP on defense?

Given that these countries spend so much on defense, Why do these countries seek US help / alliance to counter Russia?

First, let me directly answer your questions: Given that France, Germany and the UK have larger economies than that of Russia, why do they spend less in defense than that of Russia and always seem to be scared of Russia?

Does US defense spending divorced from NATO (South Korea, etc) count towards the 2 % spending threshold?

For example, Kibbutzes or hippie communies in California don't need to spend money on R&D in agriculture, or defense, or large scale law enforcement (again, you may have the luxury to exclude 1 - 3 % of psychopaths / sociopaths from a small community, and not worry about said excluded psychopaths attacking you for your communal material possessions from outside since they are dealt with by outside society), or on disaster preparedness, or on medical R&D, or pretty much any other economic overhead of modern civilization.

He needs to answer a lot of questions, so don't spend that $ 20 so fst, Schumer may need it for a «Legal Defense fund», after he spends all his campaign money trying to get re-elected JUST LIKE ALAN HEVESI DID IN 2006

I agree with EJ that there is a need for a more portable plan for those that choose not to spend their entire career in government, however, as Brodsky said, that's no reason to wreck the entire system and I don't feel EJ did a very good job of outlining his case — though Brodsky did an even worse job outlining the defense in this case.

The president will lay out a budget plan with big increases in defense spending offset by large cuts in domestic programs — exactly, his budget director told reporters, what Trump promised to do on the campaign trail.

«This bill does not address the great moral issue of our time — the fact that in three weeks 800,000 young Dreamers will lose their legal status and be subject to deportation,» said Sanders, who also objected to the bill's increase in defense spending.

Watch what they do with Social Security, Health Care, the budget, defense spending, voter rights, the environment, immigration and labor laws.

@Carpetsmoker Bernie Sanders does not support higher defense spending.

Democrats are unlikely to go along with any appropriations that boost defense spending while simultaneously trimming nondefense, as the omnibus does.

Democrats had for months insisted on equal increases for defense and nondefense spending, but in the end did not secure such parity.

Taken alone, research funding — a category that does not include development spending, which is primarily found in the Defense Department, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Energy Department — would increase by at least 2 % in fiscal 2017 based on spending measures House and Senate appropriations panels have approved, the report said.

The platform airs complaints with how the Obama Administration has handled efforts to maintain the nation's stockpile of nuclear weapons and its moves to cut spending on missile defense — and promises Republicans would do better.

During my ten years of Hapkido training, I have come to accept the fact that not everyone has the desire to spend as much time as I did learning self - defense.

by Walter Chaw I spent altogether too much time during Cheaper by the Dozen 2 anticipating the moment when Hilary Duff would snuffle some sugar cubes out of a little girl's hand — but in my defense, what else was there to do?

But the movie's beautiful last line — a sentiment expressed in so many words by the real Ms. Jenkins and impeccably delivered by Streep — is an inarguable defense of a life spent doing whatever you do, including sing off - key, with all your heart.

I don't even watch «The West Wing,» and I kept expecting her to stride in with a white paper on defense spending and slam it down on Mr. LaPaglia's desk.

Among the proposals getting short shrift from one or both chambers: the Bush - era tax cuts; all 12 annual spending bills; the arms control treaty with Russia; the defense bill; «don't ask, don't tell»; child nutrition; food safety; renewable electricity; Chinese currency manipulation; net neutrality; and cybersecurity.

Defense spending, tax codes, and the like can do nothing if the population is without knowledge.

If the super committee doesn't have an agreement by November 23, it will trigger $ 1.2 trillion in automatic across - the - board cuts — half from defense, the other half from domestic spending like education — to take effect in 2013.

Defense outside the policy limits just means that the amount spent on lawyers by the insurance company does not reduce the amount available to pay the claim.

Best of all, defense coverage is outside the policy limits so any money the insurance company spends on legal fees doesn't count against the liability limit of your policy.

Defense costs can be staggering, so this benefits both you and the insurer — you're not worried about burning through your policy limits with the cost of a lawyer and the insurer is able to continue to defend against a suit for which they may be responsible even if they spend more than the policy limits to do so.

Generally defense costs are outside of the policy limits, meaning that the money spent for your defense doesn't eat away at the money available to pay for the loss should you end up being liable.

If the government plans to cut defense spending, it means that a lot of revenue could be lost for companies that do business in this space.

Demand for General Dynamics» products is driven more by trends in government defense spending and the business jet cycle, which don't always match up with trends in the broader economy.