Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Defense Spending= Jobs Program?

Posted by on Nov. 18, 2012 at 12:52 PM
  • 18 Replies

There are a few really key objects that explain why the 20th century worked out like it did: The cyclotron, the small pox vaccine, the invention of black people and sex in the late 50s. And the tank. I just want to say, right up front, hooray for tanks. The British invented them, the Germans perfected them, and Arabs still can't win a war with them, even against other Arabs. No matter how many they have. It’s actually weird. How hard can it be? It's like American Indians never coming up with the wheel.  

And the best tank ever made is the M1 Abrams. It's got a 1500 horsepower Textron gas turbine engine and a 120 MM smoothbore cannon from the good (German) people at Rheinmetall Landsysteme GmbH. It weighs almost seventy tons, just like Rush Limbaugh, and can still do 45 mph on level ground, just like Paul Ryan. That said, the tank is a shitty welfare program.

In the vice presidential debate, Joe Biden said: "The military says we need a smaller, leaner Army. We need more special forces. ...We don’t need more M1 tanks. What we need is more UAVs."

And he's obviously right, except the M1 is made in Ohio -- the Valley of Elah for this entire election. And that's why Romney, Ryan and their ads, automated phone calls and surrogates are hammering away, like history's best tank is basically Terri Schiavo and Obama wants to yank its feeding tube.

"When you say…that we don't need any more Lima-built M1 tanks, what we are doing is we're projecting weakness, and when we project weakness abroad our enemies become more brazen!" -- Paul Ryan, in Ohio


"We need M1 tanks because they're part of the greatest military on the face of the earth. They will ensure that we have a military second to none so that we can keep the peace. We need M1 tanks!" -- Ohio Sen. Rob Portman

Here's the thing. The Army doesn't want any more M1s. We're getting a remodeled tank in 2017, and Obama would like to shut the M1 factory down and save $3 billion between now and then. This would cost 800 jobs.  

Here's the other thing. It doesn't matter what the Army wants, Congress keeps voting to make more M1s. Last year, over Army objections, the defense appropriations bill included $255 million for 42 more M1s, basically to keep the factory open. So it's welfare, plain and simple. $255 million for 800 jobs building 42 tanks for no one.

Part of the problem is the M1 is too good. We never need to replace them.  In the first Gulf War nine were damaged beyond repair. In the entire second Gulf War, we lost eighty.

Now we have 2,300 M1s deployed around the world. And three thousand (3000) more right here in California, sitting there, row-on-row, at the Sierra Army Depot.  

Enough to retake Iraq 37 times.

Hey, just a day’s drive up the I-5. Who wants to go?

LINK

This is from before the election, obviously, but brings up some points on military spending. Thoughts?


Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

by on Nov. 18, 2012 at 12:52 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
Canvas_says
by Silver Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 12:56 PM
2 moms liked this

While it's excessive and unnecessary it's a real problem when we close all of these departments, return our boys from the war front and have nothing waiting for them in the form of jobs. There are going to be a lot of idle hands soon. 

Friday
by Platinum Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 1:19 PM


Quoting Canvas_says:

While it's excessive and unnecessary it's a real problem when we close all of these departments, return our boys from the war front and have nothing waiting for them in the form of jobs. There are going to be a lot of idle hands soon. 

I agree but we need to figure something else out. We need to find a way to bring other manufacturing jobs back to the US. Something besides allowing them to exploit workers like they do in China and India.


Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

Canvas_says
by Silver Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 1:24 PM
1 mom liked this

Well the only way we will bring companies back here is to lower our corporate tax rate competitively to those countries that our jobs ship off to. With our rate as the highest rate out there of 35.6% there is little reason anyone would stay here if they can operate their business at 20%. Even Canada only has a rate of 16% last I checked. 

Quoting Friday:


Quoting Canvas_says:

While it's excessive and unnecessary it's a real problem when we close all of these departments, return our boys from the war front and have nothing waiting for them in the form of jobs. There are going to be a lot of idle hands soon. 

I agree but we need to figure something else out. We need to find a way to bring other manufacturing jobs back to the US. Something besides allowing them to exploit workers like they do in China and India.


Friday
by Platinum Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 1:37 PM
1 mom liked this


Quoting Canvas_says:

Well the only way we will bring companies back here is to lower our corporate tax rate competitively to those countries that our jobs ship off to. With our rate as the highest rate out there of 35.6% there is little reason anyone would stay here if they can operate their business at 20%. Even Canada only has a rate of 16% last I checked. 

Quoting Friday:


Quoting Canvas_says:

While it's excessive and unnecessary it's a real problem when we close all of these departments, return our boys from the war front and have nothing waiting for them in the form of jobs. There are going to be a lot of idle hands soon. 

I agree but we need to figure something else out. We need to find a way to bring other manufacturing jobs back to the US. Something besides allowing them to exploit workers like they do in China and India.


I know it's high on paper but how many companies actually pay that much? GE had a negative tax rate last year, maybe the year before, and still outsourced jobs. Yes, I see the irony that Obama is in bed with them. Even if they pay substantially less or zero taxes here they still can't treat American workers the way they treat them in other countries. People in India and China can survive on much less than Americans can.

There was a guy on Bill Maher a while back who had written a book about the conditions in the Apple plant in China. They are beyond deplorable and he said Apple was moving because the Chinese workers wanted to unionize and ask for $6 a day but workers in Malayasia would take $4.

I don't know the answer but there has to be something we can do.


Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

Canvas_says
by Silver Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 1:46 PM
1 mom liked this

    I don't really see Americans being poorly treated in our companies and yes including Walmart. I think more Americans are taken advantage of by unions than by the corporations themselves. Business men go into business to make money, and a bi product of that money is creating jobs. Many of those jobs are menial labor and require little to none in the form of a formal education, which is a huge bastion of our work force. By cutting further and further into our business mens "greed" we think we are punishing them for being greedy, when we are actually supporting them leaving and taking their jobs with them. 

    And of those companies that do somehow circumvent paying any taxes at all that is perhaps immoral to you or I. However, perfectly legal and businessmen or women will always look to cut costs and improve their bottom line. Even those that have gone global still do those same things in other countries. I very much agree with cutting out loopholes instead of increasing taxes. Since more will just find more creative ways to use those loopholes. 

Quoting Friday:


Quoting Canvas_says:

Well the only way we will bring companies back here is to lower our corporate tax rate competitively to those countries that our jobs ship off to. With our rate as the highest rate out there of 35.6% there is little reason anyone would stay here if they can operate their business at 20%. Even Canada only has a rate of 16% last I checked. 

Quoting Friday:


Quoting Canvas_says:

While it's excessive and unnecessary it's a real problem when we close all of these departments, return our boys from the war front and have nothing waiting for them in the form of jobs. There are going to be a lot of idle hands soon. 

I agree but we need to figure something else out. We need to find a way to bring other manufacturing jobs back to the US. Something besides allowing them to exploit workers like they do in China and India.


I know it's high on paper but how many companies actually pay that much? GE had a negative tax rate last year, maybe the year before, and still outsourced jobs. Yes, I see the irony that Obama is in bed with them. Even if they pay substantially less or zero taxes here they still can't treat American workers the way they treat them in other countries. People in India and China can survive on much less than Americans can.

There was a guy on Bill Maher a while back who had written a book about the conditions in the Apple plant in China. They are beyond deplorable and he said Apple was moving because the Chinese workers wanted to unionize and ask for $6 a day but workers in Malayasia would take $4.

I don't know the answer but there has to be something we can do.


Friday
by Platinum Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 2:50 PM


Quoting Canvas_says:

    I don't really see Americans being poorly treated in our companies and yes including Walmart. I think more Americans are taken advantage of by unions than by the corporations themselves. Business men go into business to make money, and a bi product of that money is creating jobs. Many of those jobs are menial labor and require little to none in the form of a formal education, which is a huge bastion of our work force. By cutting further and further into our business mens "greed" we think we are punishing them for being greedy, when we are actually supporting them leaving and taking their jobs with them. 

    And of those companies that do somehow circumvent paying any taxes at all that is perhaps immoral to you or I. However, perfectly legal and businessmen or women will always look to cut costs and improve their bottom line. Even those that have gone global still do those same things in other countries. I very much agree with cutting out loopholes instead of increasing taxes. Since more will just find more creative ways to use those loopholes. 



I'm not saying American workers are being treated as poorly as those in 3rd world nations right now but it seems accepting that kind of treatment is the only way to bring jobs back here. We cannot compete with people who can live well on dollars a day and shouldn't have to give up all the rules that keep us safe and employers accountable.

The peons of the workforce are getting the shaft tho. Look at the Hostess mess, most are blaming the union but the execs gave themselves raises while pushing the laborers to take cuts. I'm still reading and admit econ isn't my forte' but it seems the execs are more to blame for that company's fall than the workers.


Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

Canvas_says
by Silver Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 2:58 PM
1 mom liked this

any raises that the company gave their execs will be looked into. However, those paltry sums of money mean nothing as a whole when you are looking at a workforce of 18,500 people wanting more and more while the company as a whole suffers loss after loss. There is more competition in that market, more people going health conscience and leaving behind snacks, and the looming added expenses of Obamacare and other new taxes coming in next year. All of those would indicate that a company already in trouble can not sustain without making cuts somewhere. The teamsters union as far as I understand had a look at the books of the company and agreed that they had to make concessions to remain in operation. It was the separate smaller group that would not make any concessions and ultimately cost the company. 

They may have very well closed soon anyway just perhaps have kept the doors open a little longer through one of the worst economies we have seen in a very long time. 

Quoting Friday:


Quoting Canvas_says:

    I don't really see Americans being poorly treated in our companies and yes including Walmart. I think more Americans are taken advantage of by unions than by the corporations themselves. Business men go into business to make money, and a bi product of that money is creating jobs. Many of those jobs are menial labor and require little to none in the form of a formal education, which is a huge bastion of our work force. By cutting further and further into our business mens "greed" we think we are punishing them for being greedy, when we are actually supporting them leaving and taking their jobs with them. 

    And of those companies that do somehow circumvent paying any taxes at all that is perhaps immoral to you or I. However, perfectly legal and businessmen or women will always look to cut costs and improve their bottom line. Even those that have gone global still do those same things in other countries. I very much agree with cutting out loopholes instead of increasing taxes. Since more will just find more creative ways to use those loopholes. 



I'm not saying American workers are being treated as poorly as those in 3rd world nations right now but it seems accepting that kind of treatment is the only way to bring jobs back here. We cannot compete with people who can live well on dollars a day and shouldn't have to give up all the rules that keep us safe and employers accountable.

The peons of the workforce are getting the shaft tho. Look at the Hostess mess, most are blaming the union but the execs gave themselves raises while pushing the laborers to take cuts. I'm still reading and admit econ isn't my forte' but it seems the execs are more to blame for that company's fall than the workers.


Friday
by Platinum Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 3:09 PM


Quoting Canvas_says:

any raises that the company gave their execs will be looked into. However, those paltry sums of money mean nothing as a whole when you are looking at a workforce of 18,500 people wanting more and more while the company as a whole suffers loss after loss. There is more competition in that market, more people going health conscience and leaving behind snacks, and the looming added expenses of Obamacare and other new taxes coming in next year. All of those would indicate that a company already in trouble can not sustain without making cuts somewhere. The teamsters union as far as I understand had a look at the books of the company and agreed that they had to make concessions to remain in operation. It was the separate smaller group that would not make any concessions and ultimately cost the company. 

They may have very well closed soon anyway just perhaps have kept the doors open a little longer through one of the worst economies we have seen in a very long time. 

Quoting Friday:


Quoting Canvas_says:

    I don't really see Americans being poorly treated in our companies and yes including Walmart. I think more Americans are taken advantage of by unions than by the corporations themselves. Business men go into business to make money, and a bi product of that money is creating jobs. Many of those jobs are menial labor and require little to none in the form of a formal education, which is a huge bastion of our work force. By cutting further and further into our business mens "greed" we think we are punishing them for being greedy, when we are actually supporting them leaving and taking their jobs with them. 

    And of those companies that do somehow circumvent paying any taxes at all that is perhaps immoral to you or I. However, perfectly legal and businessmen or women will always look to cut costs and improve their bottom line. Even those that have gone global still do those same things in other countries. I very much agree with cutting out loopholes instead of increasing taxes. Since more will just find more creative ways to use those loopholes. 



I'm not saying American workers are being treated as poorly as those in 3rd world nations right now but it seems accepting that kind of treatment is the only way to bring jobs back here. We cannot compete with people who can live well on dollars a day and shouldn't have to give up all the rules that keep us safe and employers accountable.

The peons of the workforce are getting the shaft tho. Look at the Hostess mess, most are blaming the union but the execs gave themselves raises while pushing the laborers to take cuts. I'm still reading and admit econ isn't my forte' but it seems the execs are more to blame for that company's fall than the workers.


From what I've read the raises weren't paltry and there's additional spending that wasn't necessary, plus the workers had already taken cuts. An investigation has been requested of the BK court so hopefully they will figure it all out.


Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

Canvas_says
by Silver Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 3:21 PM

By paltry sum of money I was talking at how the raises themselves didn't add up to much of a loss. If you took even a million dollar raise to one man and divided it up among the 18,500 employees you're talking only 54 dollars a year. Those raises they gave those particular men would not have saved the company. 

Quoting Friday:


Friday
by Platinum Member on Nov. 18, 2012 at 3:27 PM


Quoting Canvas_says:

By paltry sum of money I was talking at how the raises themselves didn't add up to much of a loss. If you took even a million dollar raise to one man and divided it up among the 18,500 employees you're talking only 54 dollars a year. Those raises they gave those particular men would not have saved the company. 

Quoting Friday:


There's more to it than that. An article about it was posted the other day and completely ignored by all of the Conservatives here.


Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN