F-35 video.

[JoeRedskin]

I think CRed's point was that both the endless reward programs and the 200 Million dollar jets should be cut.

Excessive defense spending and excessive entitlement programs are making it impossible to climb out of debt. Despite being deep in debt, we continue to spend like there is no tomorrow.

It's a sweet plane, no doubt ... but, really, where is the need? Keep the plans, run the prototype, keep testing to see if we can upgrade, and, if we get into a war where we need the next generation of fighter, then build (yes, yes ... I know there would be lag time). Right now, we have more than 3 times as many planes as the next largest air force (China) and more than twice as many aircraft as China & Russia (the 3rd largest air force) combined. Total Aircraft by Country

We already have the numbers and tech advantage by a large, large margin. Is now the time to be guilding the weaponry lily? Which makes you better prepared for a real, old style war? The hottest tech or the strongest economy? I would suggest the second.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I think CRed's point was that both the endless reward programs and the 200 Million dollar jets should be cut.

Excessive defense spending and excessive entitlement programs are making it impossible to climb out of debt. Despite being deep in debt, we continue to spend like there is no tomorrow.

It's a sweet plane, no doubt ... but, really, where is the need? Keep the plans, run the prototype, keep testing to see if we can upgrade, and, if we get into a war where we need the next generation of fighter, then build (yes, yes ... I know there would be lag time). Right now, we have more than 3 times as many planes as the next largest air force (China) and more than twice as many aircraft as China & Russia (the 3rd largest air force) combined. Total Aircraft by Country

We already have the numbers and tech advantage by a large, large margin. Is now the time to be guilding the weaponry lily? Which makes you better prepared for a real, old style war? The hottest tech or the strongest economy? I would suggest the second.

This.

I am not big on social spending either but, from JR's website:

Defense Spending
Data through 2011; shown in USD
US - $692,000,000,000
China - $100,000,000,000
UK - $73,746,170,000
Japan - $70,495,000,000
Russia - $56,000,000,000

So, if we accept that the UK and Japan would aid us in time of a war with either Russia or China, that puts our combined spending at nearly 6 times the combined spending of our two most likely enemies. But keep in mind that China/Russia have a large portion of their money tied up in protecting their shared border.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I think CRed's point was that both the endless reward programs and the 200 Million dollar jets should be cut.

Excessive defense spending and excessive entitlement programs are making it impossible to climb out of debt. Despite being deep in debt, we continue to spend like there is no tomorrow.

It's a sweet plane, no doubt ... but, really, where is the need? Keep the plans, run the prototype, keep testing to see if we can upgrade, and, if we get into a war where we need the next generation of fighter, then build (yes, yes ... I know there would be lag time). Right now, we have more than 3 times as many planes as the next largest air force (China) and more than twice as many aircraft as China & Russia (the 3rd largest air force) combined. Total Aircraft by Country

We already have the numbers and tech advantage by a large, large margin. Is now the time to be guilding the weaponry lily? Which makes you better prepared for a real, old style war? The hottest tech or the strongest economy? I would suggest the second.

Yea....I got it Joe, but thanx for the....insight nonetheless. FWIW, I would choose the second as well.
BUT, my original....mind numbing point. Absurd, irresponsible social spending and Military spending (although possibly over the top) are incomparable. One actually gains you something and the other digs and ever deepening hole.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Hog1

Yea....I got it Joe, but thanx for the....insight nonetheless. FWIW, I would choose the second as well.
BUT, my original....mind numbing point. Absurd, irresponsible social spending and Military spending (although possibly over the top) are incomparable. One actually gains you something and the other digs and ever deepening hole.

Neither gains you anything, and both put you deeper in holes. If a bully can beat you up with a set of brass knuckles, the fact that they are diamond studded doesn't add to the deterrent. We have jet fighters, which if we had maintained production instead of randomly saying they are at the end of their design span, would give plenty of deterrent for the value. Adding a one size fit all fighter, doesn't suddenly make our stick stronger, but it makes our economy less sound.

Another question I have, is although we hope not to lose any, certainly we could expect to lose some, if we got into a real dog fight of a war, how many of these would we be expected to manufacture, and at what cost to our economy?

Social spending in and of itself is not wrong, just as there is necessary defense spending, but a 200million fighter is as over the top, as a social net protecting illegal aliens. (i might fall into the statue of liberty's camp and say that a social system which protects the weakest among us, is better than a designer fighter jet)

The New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
Emma Lazarus, 1883

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Hog1

Yea....I got it Joe, but thanx for the....insight nonetheless. FWIW, I would choose the second as well.
BUT, my original....mind numbing point. Absurd, irresponsible social spending and Military spending (although possibly over the top) are incomparable. One actually gains you something and the other digs and ever deepening hole.

We are, as usual, probably closer in agreement than what seems to be coming across. Absurd spending, whether defense or social digs a hole. The hole is slightly different, one is made of - to use CRed's analysis - diamond studded brass knuckles and the other is made of a burgeoning dependent population.

I understand your point in that, absurd, irresponsible social spending essentially begets more absurd, irresponsible social spending. Meanwhile, absurd, irresponsible defense spending gets you a bunch of diamond studded brass knuckles.

The only point I make is that absurd, irresponsible spending - whether defense or social - is wrong and the F-35 is simply not a necessary expense.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

We are, as usual, probably closer in agreement than what seems to be coming across. Absurd spending, whether defense or social digs a hole. The hole is slightly different, one is made of - to use CRed's analysis - diamond studded brass knuckles and the other is made of a burgeoning dependent population.

I understand your point in that, absurd, irresponsible social spending essentially begets more absurd, irresponsible social spending. Meanwhile, absurd, irresponsible defense spending gets you a bunch of diamond studded brass knuckles.

The only point I make is that absurd, irresponsible spending - whether defense or social - is wrong and the F-35 is simply not a necessary expense.

Fair enough....and on another note if any of you have...NOT been to an airshow with a significant military presence performing. You...Really need to treat yourself...

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I think CRed's point was that both the endless reward programs and the 200 Million dollar jets should be cut.

Excessive defense spending and excessive entitlement programs are making it impossible to climb out of debt. Despite being deep in debt, we continue to spend like there is no tomorrow.

Completely agree with the above and I'd say they are two sides of the same coin. Excessive entitlement programs benefit the lowest echelon, while excessive defense spending is essentially a windfall for the elite. Of course, i'm factoring in our defense policy as a whole, not just ridiculously priced jets. Who doesn't benefit from either? The middle class! Yay for working, legally, for a living! Woohoo...etc.