If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Fox News is disgusted that N0bama wants to put thousands of defense contractors out of work, simply because the deficit is so high and the underbody rust proofing for bullets has yet to be proven of value   (foxnews.com) divider line 67
    More: Dumbass, Fox News, deficits, defense contractors, Prince William County, David Plouffe  
•       •       •

1093 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Oct 2012 at 11:43 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



67 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-24 10:28:33 AM
We have shown the overall employment effects - including direct, indirect, and induced job creation - of spending on the military in contrast with four alternative domestic spending categories: clean energy, health care, education, and increasing household consumption through tax cuts. Specifically, we have shown that spending on all of these alternatives to military spending create substantially more jobs per $1 billion in expenditures relative to military spending. Link, .pdf
 
2012-10-24 10:58:19 AM
If you ever want to see how malleable political positions and convictions are specifically by the press, look no further.
 
2012-10-24 11:00:26 AM
Isn't that what Republicans want? The phrase "government dole" comes to mind.

www.tc.umn.edu
 
2012-10-24 11:10:21 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: We have shown the overall employment effects - including direct, indirect, and induced job creation - of spending on the military in contrast with four alternative domestic spending categories: clean energy, health care, education, and increasing household consumption through tax cuts. Specifically, we have shown that spending on all of these alternatives to military spending create substantially more jobs per $1 billion in expenditures relative to military spending. Link, .pdf



None of that matters. Virginia received $54 billion last year alone in defense contracts. And without looking into it, I'm willing to bet a significant chunk of that is Navy work. This is most likely the reason Romney is talking about building more boats. He's not stupid. He knows that we have a vastly modernized and technically advanced navy as compared to the Navy in 1916. That's not the point. He's letting the people of Virginia know that he's going to keep the money flowing in (whether he really is or not). He desperately wants to tip the balance in that state.

Fox News is simply spreading the word for him in this article - and interestingly, I didn't even read the full article. I knew what it would be about so I clicked the link, hit CTRL-F and searched for "Virginia" and lo and behold...
 
2012-10-24 11:46:32 AM
Bayonet manufacturers outraged.
 
2012-10-24 11:46:54 AM
I said it yesterday, and I'll say it again today.

Just once, I want a Republican politician to come out and say "look, we don't know anything about international security. We don't know anything about 21st century warfighting. We're just going to give billions and billions of taxpayer dollars to defense contractors, alright? But it'll be okay, because we'll defund Sesame Street to pay for it."
 
2012-10-24 11:47:46 AM
Impossible. Government can't create jobs. I read it on Fox News.
 
2012-10-24 11:48:05 AM
Let the private sector decide! Business does not need government help!
 
2012-10-24 11:49:43 AM
The amazing thing is that the sequestration hits social programs just as hard and you never hear about it.
 
2012-10-24 11:52:42 AM

Bleyo: Impossible. Government can't create jobs. I read it on Fox News.


As I was getting ready this morning the same thought about cognitive dissonance entered my mind.

Fox and Romney say the government can't create private sector jobs. But, the defense industry is a prime example of "private sector" jobs created by the government.
 
2012-10-24 11:53:32 AM
spending tax payer money on programs that aren't needed just to keep people employed is somehow not welfare to republicans
 
2012-10-24 11:53:32 AM
derp derp something Fox News
/derp
 
2012-10-24 11:53:41 AM

GameSprocket: The amazing thing is that the sequestration hits social programs just as hard and you never hear about it.


Poor people are not entitled to that money since they do not have the inherent nobility of being a defense contractor.
 
2012-10-24 11:53:44 AM

clkeagle: I said it yesterday, and I'll say it again today.

Just once, I want a Republican politician to come out and say "look, we don't know anything about international security. We don't know anything about 21st century warfighting. We're just going to give billions and billions of taxpayer dollars to defense contractors, alright? But it'll be okay, because we'll defund Sesame Street to pay for it."


You want a politician, much less a Republican, to be honest?
 
2012-10-24 11:54:01 AM

GameSprocket: The amazing thing is that the sequestration hits social programs just as hard and you never hear about it.


Perhaps because conventional wisdom was that those were going to get cut anyway; at least with sequestration, the military actually gets cut too.
 
2012-10-24 11:54:43 AM

GameSprocket: The amazing thing is that the sequestration hits social programs just as hard and you never hear about it.


That's because people who receive benefits through social programs are lazy immoral layabouts suckling on the government teat.

People who receive billions through defense contracts are salt of the earth job creators and captains of industry.

/defense contractor
 
2012-10-24 11:55:16 AM

kidgenius: Bleyo: Impossible. Government can't create jobs. I read it on Fox News.

As I was getting ready this morning the same thought about cognitive dissonance entered my mind.

Fox and Romney say the government can't create private sector jobs. But, the defense industry is a prime example of "private sector" jobs created by the government.


What they really mean to say is that government should create jobs by giving billions to private entities so they can take their cut off the top and make their quarterly earnings targets, instead of hiring people directly to do the same job for less money.
 
2012-10-24 11:55:36 AM
Or we could have funded the Afghanistan and Iraq wars with tax increases.
 
2012-10-24 11:56:33 AM

Lumpmoose: Isn't that what Republicans want? The phrase "government dole" comes to mind.

[www.tc.umn.edu image 850x562]


Do you have that same chart broken out by federal level employment and state/local levels (which cannot simply print money to keep public sector employees on the payroll)?
 
2012-10-24 11:57:02 AM
It's confusing: government doesn't create jobs-- the private sector does; but cutting government contracts will destroy jobs.

Soooo... special plead much?
 
2012-10-24 11:57:49 AM

Lumpmoose: Isn't that what Republicans want?


No, they just think they can erase the deficity by de-funding NPR and PBS, and removing refrigerators from poor people's homes.
 
2012-10-24 11:58:24 AM

Kuta: Or we could have funded the Afghanistan and Iraq wars with tax increases.


Blasphemy.

[bodysnatchersdonsuthscream.jpg]
 
2012-10-24 11:58:25 AM
The question of whether Congress will avoid the steep automatic spending cuts set to take affect in January...

See where your anti-intellectual streak has gotten you, Fock Snooze? You can't even write too good!
 
2012-10-24 11:59:36 AM
As someone who is working and has in the past worked for defense contractors, I say "good". Lockheed, Boeing, McDonnell, General Dynamics, and a host of others have offices and armies of lobbyists to defend their sweet cheddar, while it would be far cheaper if the USG hired folks to do this stuff directly.

Let's start with not outsourcing military supply chain and logistics. Sure, military payroll might be higher, but we won't be paying $50/hour for $15/meal line cooks to serve chow to our $11/hour PFCs.

// numbers rectally extracted
 
2012-10-24 12:01:15 PM
Is 2012 the year that people learn that cutting government spending has consequences?
 
2012-10-24 12:01:28 PM
Isn't that what Republicans want? The phrase "government dole" comes to mind.

You obviously don't know the difference between Government contractors and Government employees.
 
2012-10-24 12:01:37 PM
What we really need is another World War so 12 million Americans can get back to work for defense contractors.

Romney 2012
 
2012-10-24 12:01:45 PM

UberDave:

None of that matters. Virginia received $54 billion last year alone in defense contracts.


What if those contractors turned rogue and sold secrets to another land, and decided that disabling the military infrastructure was an acceptable punishment for not getting their annual tribute . . .? 

I'm sure no one in Virginia would consider declaring war against the US
 
2012-10-24 12:02:06 PM

jodaveki: It's confusing: government doesn't create jobs-- the private sector does; but cutting government contracts will destroy jobs.

Soooo... special plead much?


They will never be able to recognize this cognitive dissonance. Not ever.
 
2012-10-24 12:02:34 PM
It doesn't matter that it is pork barrel spending, corporate welfare, or the largest drain on our national deficit...... It doesn't matter that the R&D is some the the most gut wrenching examples of government waist.....it doesn't matter that the US needs to be constantly involved in conflict globally to maintain the excuse for this type of government spending at the cost of U.S. citizens lives........because the military industrial complex supports the GOP.

Party Above Country
 
2012-10-24 12:03:35 PM
Government spending is bad and we demand deep government spending cuts. OMG 0BAMA IS CUTTING SPENDING BURN HIM!
 
2012-10-24 12:05:55 PM
Actually the government DOES create jobs. I start working for the Air Force as a civilian employee next monday after a year long lay off... THANKS Nobama!
 
2012-10-24 12:09:53 PM
So government (stimulus) funding doesn't create jobs, but cutting government (defence) funding does kill jobs. Got it.
 
2012-10-24 12:10:15 PM

kidgenius: Fox and Romney say the government can't create private sector jobs. But, the defense industry is a prime example of "private sector" jobs created by the government.


I'm completely over this whole "Defense Industry" nonsense.

Dragging up some of the discussion from the "2000 tanks in storage" thread, these slimeballs need to diversify their product lines and partner/license/merge with non-defense manufacturers wherever possible. In this time of soaring deficits, growing debt, and low-intensity engagements, we need to be able to pass single-year "freezes" on high-dollar (say $25,000,000+) defense acquisition contracts. In turn, those defense contractors need to have another viable plan for continued operation during those years.

This is the 21st century. If you're building wheeled vehicles for the US Army one year, you should be able to switch to armored civilian transport trucks, SWAT vans, or fire engines the next year with a minimal interruption in production. Building tanks? Switch to bulldozers. Building military transport aircraft? Switch to commercial transport aircraft.

Here's what will happen as a result. Right now, contractors design every single panel, every engine valve, every antenna jack, every battery, every nut and bolt to be a custom part for the military. Diversifying into commercial and other public-sector products will, by common sense, allow for a much greater commonality of parts. What will this do in turn? Instantly turn military personnel (especially on the maintenance side) into qualified and experienced candidates for the civilian world.

That's win/win. Companies can hire veterans, they don't have to spend huge amounts of time and money just training their personnel or sending them to schools, and they might be able to get discounted health premiums since they are hiring people who have been taking physical fitness tests every year. And the military doesn't have the huge numbers of senior enlisted sticking around for 20+ years, because a sizable percentage will get out sooner for those civilian jobs. This drives down retirement payments and VA health costs, which are huge chunks of the federal budget. The DoD would also be able to send fewer contractors to combat locations. Many contractors are being sent now due to their expertise on certain hardware or software that the military "normally" doesn't use. If the military adopts civilian-style hardware and software up front, they don't have to play catch-up when the poo hits the spinning blades.

Would it be difficult and expensive to implement? Hell yes. Would it be worth it for the civilian industry, public sector industry, military industry, workers at each level, and ultimately the taxpayers? Yes. Yes it would.
 
2012-10-24 12:10:42 PM

Tom_Thump: Actually the government DOES create jobs. I start working for the Air Force as a civilian employee next monday after a year long lay off... THANKS Nobama!


And I rolled into contracting job immediately after completing my 5 year obligation in the Marine Corps. It feels good to be gainfully employed. Haters gonna hate.
 
2012-10-24 12:13:10 PM

blackminded: GameSprocket: The amazing thing is that the sequestration hits social programs just as hard and you never hear about it.

That's because people who receive benefits through social programs are lazy immoral layabouts suckling on the government teat.

People who receive billions through defense contracts are salt of the earth job creators and captains of industry.

/defense contractor


We take all the Poor...and make them Defense Contractors!
 
2012-10-24 12:13:39 PM

clkeagle: Building military transport aircraft? Switch to commercial transport aircraft.


This is actually a serious problem with airplanes; commercial aircraft aren't under the same mission requirements as military aircraft, and thus have a huge incentive to switch to two engines because it's more fuel efficient. Military large-body aircraft should be using 3+ whenever possible, especially when it's a mission-critical role, to ensure that a relatively small farkup like an engine going out doesn't cause a mission to fail.
 
2012-10-24 12:14:33 PM

TedDalton: Lumpmoose: Isn't that what Republicans want? The phrase "government dole" comes to mind.

[www.tc.umn.edu image 850x562]

Do you have that same chart broken out by federal level employment and state/local levels (which cannot simply print money to keep public sector employees on the payroll)?


No and that's a good point. A lot of that is probably due to shrinking state budgets. But it's hard to argue that government has grown under Obama and I don't think that's necessarily a good thing. Either way, it doesn't give Republicans much to biatch about unless you worship the disproved premise of austerity during a recession.
 
2012-10-24 12:14:57 PM
And ironically I got laid off by... a government contractor!
 
2012-10-24 12:17:51 PM

Tom_Thump: And ironically I got laid off by... a government contractor!


What's ironic about that? It's par for the course, in the contracting world.
 
2012-10-24 12:18:38 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: spending tax payer money on programs that aren't needed just to keep people employed is somehow not welfare to republicans


Money spent to educate and feed dark skin people = Wasteful Pork

Money spent to blow up dark skin people = Not Wasteful Pork
 
2012-10-24 12:19:57 PM

clkeagle: Right now, contractors design every single panel, every engine valve, every antenna jack, every battery, every nut and bolt to be a custom part for the military. Diversifying into commercial and other public-sector products will, by common sense, allow for a much greater commonality of parts.


Also, I really don't know what the fark you're talking about when you say everything's a custom part. There's a massive amount of standards out there that are commonly used for components. The end product may be a custom part, but you still use stock zees cut in a certain way and fastened with stock NAS rivets to stock sheet metal of a spec'd material and temper. Truly unique components are exceptionally rare and are only generally used when they're particularly difficult to make and have very rare components. Maybe you mean that assemblies or other end products would become common among industries, in which case you're just flat out wrong.
 
2012-10-24 12:23:33 PM
The cuts were part of a 2011 deal to raise the federal debt ceiling to avert an unprecedented default. Republicans and Democrats decided to use the threat of objectionable cuts to prod Congress into agreeing on more reasonable cuts at a later date. But congressional negotiators never agreed on those more reasonable cuts, leaving the door open for the automatic cuts.


So what they're saying is that Obama is both "Republicans" and "Democrats", as well as "congressional negotiators", all while apparently playing golf 24/7 88 times in three years, AND being President? Wow, talk about playing some Iron Man football. Is there a job in Washington that Obama doesn't do?
 
2012-10-24 12:25:08 PM
Republicans have been running all across NC with their "OMG Obama is going to cut defense spending!!!" shrieking, especially to the big military bases and communities. We even had Ryan and McCain show up at Fort Bragg to talk about how all these cuts would cause Fort Bragg to turn into a shadow of its current self, send unemployed workers onto the streets in droves, and turn eastern NC into a hell hole of government dependent workers desperate for a job.

Except, that last part describes the contractors that currently cluster around Fort Bragg, Camp Lejeune, Cherry Point, Seymore Johnson and all the smaller bases NC is home to. Dependent on that sweet, sweet government military contract money.
 
2012-10-24 12:25:32 PM
Oh looky what I found in here! Actual intelligent sensible back and forth.

*swoon*

Gots nothing but the sheer enjoyment of the atmosphere. :)
 
2012-10-24 12:27:39 PM

utahraptor2: Tom_Thump: And ironically I got laid off by... a government contractor!

What's ironic about that? It's par for the course, in the contracting world.


Well I worked in facilities, not on the contracts. Oh well, Just glad to be going back to work finally.
 
2012-10-24 12:28:12 PM
Defense Contractors = The Real Welfare Queens
 
2012-10-24 12:28:55 PM

Bendal: Republicans have been running all across NC with their "OMG Obama is going to cut defense spending!!!" shrieking, especially to the big military bases and communities. We even had Ryan and McCain show up at Fort Bragg to talk about how all these cuts would cause Fort Bragg to turn into a shadow of its current self, send unemployed workers onto the streets in droves, and turn eastern NC into a hell hole of government dependent workers desperate for a job.

Except, that last part describes the contractors that currently cluster around Fort Bragg, Camp Lejeune, Cherry Point, Seymore Johnson and all the smaller bases NC is home to. Dependent on that sweet, sweet government military contract money.


Just so's you know, it's the same in VA. Some of the same areas complaining about Zerobamzero's wasteful spending are hammering him for "costing the state 210,000 jobs due to sequestration". Looking at you, Fairfax, Norfolk and Quantico (and George Allen's entire campaign).
 
2012-10-24 12:49:55 PM

Tom_Thump: Actually the government DOES create jobs. I start working for the Air Force as a civilian employee next monday after a year long lay off... THANKS Nobama!


Goverment Civillian, or Contractor? HAFB by any chance?!?!?
 
2012-10-24 12:50:01 PM

Tom_Thump: Actually the government DOES create jobs. I start working for the Air Force as a civilian employee next monday after a year long lay off... THANKS Nobama!


If you're a USAF civilian, then thank you for working. My defense contractor job exists to support people like you.

//Total welfare queen. Love living on the dole.
 
Displayed 50 of 67 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report