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.

(Washington Examiner)   And it is a bargain at only $59 a gallon   (washingtonexaminer.com) divider line 108
    More: Asinine, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, fixed price, jet fuel, renewable fuels, U.S. Air Force, Defense Logistics Agency  
•       •       •

15827 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 May 2013 at 5:45 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-05 01:56:43 AM

aerojockey: So let's just drop the crap about "green jobs" and "green economy".  We have to be honest with ourselves that helping the environment, while a worthy goal, comes with a cost.


Exactly. Considering the year over year profits that Wal-Mart and similar companies keep raking in, most people don't give a flying fark about green anything. Not if I can't get my god damn rollbacks!
 
2013-05-05 02:21:58 AM

NephilimNexus: General #1: "So they want us to use environmentally friendly fuel or something..."
General #2: "What kind of commie hippie crap is this?"
General #1: "We don't have a choice."
General #2: "Sure we do.  Watch... we'll just order the most over-priced crap there is and let the media find out about it."
General #1: "What good does that do us?"
General #2: "When they find out how much we're spending on that stupid commie hippie gas then they'll do a complete about-face on the whole thing and insist we go back to using good old fashioned, God-given he-man black death smog gas to save money."
General #1: "Brilliant!"


Actually, the military tends to be very interested in alternative energy.
 
2013-05-05 03:11:39 AM

hasty ambush: How to Cut the Military Budget Without Touching Defense

"Office of Naval Research's recent effort to track how babies interact with robots, which concluded after much observation that "if you want to build a companion robot, it is not sufficient to make it look human ... the robot must be able to interact socially."

"disease victims and medical specialists have pressured the Pentagon into spending more than a billion dollars annually for research that is often not related to injuries experienced on the battlefield, such as breast and prostate cancer. The Government Accountability Office concluded last February that these programs are often poorly coordinated with civilian health agencies, and their administration by the Pentagon eats up around $45 million in overhead and management.

Overall Pentagon spending for research and development now totals $73 billion, Coburn's report states, an amount that exceeds the total spent for that purpose by all other federal agencies and includes much research that does not "enhance the technological superiority of our soldiers or improve the defense of our nation."

"military ranks are now top-heavy with generals and admirals, pushing up defense costs by hundreds of thousands of dollars because each has a large retinue of aides. The current proportion is seven general officers for every 10,000 troops, two more than during the Cold War. "We almost now have an admiral for every ship in the Navy,"

"the military is needlessly operating 64 schools on 16 military installations around the country, at a cost averaging $50,000 per student. The national average for other schools is $11,000 per student. According to the report, the Pentagon picks up the tab mostly out of inertia, continuing a practice begun when public schools were not as integrated as military families were."

"$1.5 million the military is spending to create more palatable beef jerky -- on top of more than $600,000 being spent by others in the government. "


While I agree with most of the items listed in your linked article (I didn't read the attachment), this one misses the mark completely. Those schools are not operated because of lingering segregation issues. They are operated because the local school systems often cannot support the amount of students the military brings into predominantly rural areas.

For the bases where students use civilian schools, the school is refunded the cost of their military kids. By and large, service members don't own the houses they live in while stationed in town, and therefore don't contribute to the taxes used to fund the school systems. Either way the government is paying more for military student's education.

I grew up attending these schools, and I can tell you that they are very nice schools. I never had to provide my own pencils, paper, art supplies, etc. We had large computer labs, new equipment, and great labs. They may be able to cut some of the budget, but given the godforsaken, middle-of-nowhere location of many of our military installations (Grand Forks, Yakima, Fort Irwin, Fort Polk - just to name a few) there is no way they can shutter them all.

Plus, those totals probably include the DoD dependent schools in Germany, Italy, Korea, Japan, etc.
 
2013-05-05 03:16:46 AM

ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: NephilimNexus: General #1: "So they want us to use environmentally friendly fuel or something..."
General #2: "What kind of commie hippie crap is this?"
General #1: "We don't have a choice."
General #2: "Sure we do.  Watch... we'll just order the most over-priced crap there is and let the media find out about it."
General #1: "What good does that do us?"
General #2: "When they find out how much we're spending on that stupid commie hippie gas then they'll do a complete about-face on the whole thing and insist we go back to using good old fashioned, God-given he-man black death smog gas to save money."
General #1: "Brilliant!"

Actually, the military tends to be very interested in alternative energy.


Here at Ft. Bliss, the base is attempting to go completely net-zero for electricity, water and trash by 2015. They have built solar panels everywhere, are tapping into geothermal pockets, have no-flush toilets, etc.

From the military's perspective, being reliant on foreign sources for energy is a huge gaping hole in our national defense. They have also realized that in order to ensure long-term support of the local communities near military installations, they have to be very cautious with their levels of pollution.
 
2013-05-05 05:43:34 AM
The military has one answer to every single need.  Throw money at it.  Because when little billy says "but daddy, the MEAN kids!", daddy can't say no.
 
2013-05-05 01:15:59 PM

k_46r_a: Here at Ft. Bliss, the base is attempting to go completely net-zero for electricity, water and trash by 2015. They have built solar panels everywhere, are tapping into geothermal pockets, have no-flush toilets, etc.


So basically preppers with automatic weapons.

Well, it can help their chances when the zombie apocalypse comes down.
 
2013-05-05 04:46:26 PM

cman: thamike: It's renewable.

Renewable does not automatically mean sustainable


But subjectivity is objective.
 
2013-05-05 09:36:55 PM

k_46r_a: While I agree with most of the items listed in your linked article (I didn't read the attachment), this one misses the mark completely. Those schools are not operated because of lingering segregation issues. They are operated because the local school systems often cannot support the amount of students the military brings into predominantly rural areas.

For the bases where students use civilian schools, the school is refunded the cost of their military kids. By and large, service members don't own the houses they live in while stationed in town, and therefore don't contribute to the taxes used to fund the school systems. Either way the government is paying more for military student's education.

I grew up attending these schools, and I can tell you that they are very nice schools. I never had to provide my own pencils, paper, art supplies, etc. We had large computer labs, new equipment, and great labs. They may be able to cut some of the budget, but given the godforsaken, middle-of-nowhere location of many of our military installations (Grand Forks, Yakima, Fort Irwin, Fort Polk - just to name a few) there is no way they can shutter them all.

Plus, those totals probably include the DoD dependent schools in Germany, Italy, Korea, Japan, etc.


I was a military brat also and attendied dependent schools in Krautland ie (Kaiserslautern American High school). For a time the US even operated a boarding shcool for the children of service members assigned to Turkey.

However the stateside schools are largely uneeded (Randolph AFB for example) Local communities are compensated for the non local tax paying service memebers' dependents through Federal impact aid funding. Link which is cheaper per student than the DOD running its own schools.

As for remote loactions they should be unaccompanied shorter tours of duty eliminating the need for DOD schools same for overseas assignments
 
Displayed 8 of 108 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report