F-35 video.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

You first question - I have no idea.
You statement after that.... I view it like software.
I becomes obsolete the day you release it.

so we shouldn't worry about hard costs because of unknown soft savings? that sounds like the type of math that leaves republicans screaming at social welfare spending. And I believe we are only building 32 of these so my guess is that we aren't replacing all the 7 types anytime soon given the numbers from JRs link.

I don't get the software analogy at all.

[saden1]

In the era of intercontinental ballistic missiles and star wars like air defense systems do we even need war planes?

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by saden1

In the era of intercontinental ballistic missiles and star wars like air defense systems do we even need war planes?

[Daseal]

Not that I agree with the purchasing of the jets, but lets not act like the middle class gains nothing. A big part of these contracts is creating jobs for everyone from aerospace engineers to someone that manufactures sheet metal. Is may not be the payout some people see, but it's a paycheck. I'd rather see us find alternate way to create jobs, but there are positives that come from this for thousands of people.

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Not that I agree with the purchasing of the jets, but lets not act like the middle class gains nothing. A big part of these contracts is creating jobs for everyone from aerospace engineers to someone that manufactures sheet metal. Is may not be the payout some people see, but it's a paycheck. I'd rather see us find alternate way to create jobs, but there are positives that come from this for thousands of people.

Absolutely true, but as you alluded to, my point was that there is a drastic difference in the "money for nothing" benefits experienced by either endpoint and that experienced by the middle class.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Not that I agree with the purchasing of the jets, but lets not act like the middle class gains nothing. A big part of these contracts is creating jobs for everyone from aerospace engineers to someone that manufactures sheet metal. Is may not be the payout some people see, but it's a paycheck. I'd rather see us find alternate way to create jobs, but there are positives that come from this for thousands of people.

So, no jobs would be created if the money was left in the hands of taxpayers, or if there wasn't as much of a drain on the economy by the toll of the national debt?

The same can be said for EVERY government dollar spent, even for social net spending. Somewhere someone is receiving each of those dollars spent for services rendered. Whether it is a 75000 dollar a year engineer, or a 55000 dollar a year social service worker. In fact I highly doubt many minimum wage jobs are going into the production of those 32 planes (maybe if new facilities were needed, but even then with the security clearances probably needed, I imagine they were higher paying construction jobs). Conversely, in social net spending most all of those dollars are going to pay for mid level bureacrat salaries, and local construction, or money right back that gets put right back into the economy in the form of food or housing payments.

Point is just because some good comes from a reckless project (in defense or social net spending) doesn't mean that project has an overall good result.

[Daseal]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

So, no jobs would be created if the money was left in the hands of taxpayers, or if there wasn't as much of a drain on the economy by the toll of the national debt?

The same can be said for EVERY government dollar spent, even for social net spending. Somewhere someone is receiving each of those dollars spent for services rendered. Whether it is a 75000 dollar a year engineer, or a 55000 dollar a year social service worker. In fact I highly doubt many minimum wage jobs are going into the production of those 32 planes (maybe if new facilities were needed, but even then with the security clearances probably needed, I imagine they were higher paying construction jobs). Conversely, in social net spending most all of those dollars are going to pay for mid level bureacrat salaries, and local construction, or money right back that gets put right back into the economy in the form of food or housing payments.

Point is just because some good comes from a reckless project (in defense or social net spending) doesn't mean that project has an overall good result.

I agree with pretty much everything you said. You guys know me, always looking for the positive spin on something. I guess that's my thought as to why this program has continued to gain funding. It's the way American politics work. Congressman from some state keeps supporting it as long as Widget Y production is kept in their district.

Personally, I believe putting money in the hands of the people is the way to really stimulate the economy. People like me spend money on things -- both necessities and frivilous things to which I pay sales tax and don't go through the effort to find loopholes/etc. Businesses take that money and are typically a bit smarter with it. That is one of the fundamental economic differences we see in this country. Chicken or the egg. Do businesses with money create jobs, or do people with money create the demand for jobs. Personally, I believe the latter, but my economics training is limited at best!

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

So, no jobs would be created if the money was left in the hands of taxpayers, or if there wasn't as much of a drain on the economy by the toll of the national debt?

The same can be said for EVERY government dollar spent, even for social net spending. Somewhere someone is receiving each of those dollars spent for services rendered. Whether it is a 75000 dollar a year engineer, or a 55000 dollar a year social service worker. In fact I highly doubt many minimum wage jobs are going into the production of those 32 planes (maybe if new facilities were needed, but even then with the security clearances probably needed, I imagine they were higher paying construction jobs). Conversely, in social net spending most all of those dollars are going to pay for mid level bureacrat salaries, and local construction, or money right back that gets put right back into the economy in the form of food or housing payments.

Point is just because some good comes from a reckless project (in defense or social net spending) doesn't mean that project has an overall good result.

And like the NFL draft we will not know for years to come.
The F-15 had huge cost issues when it was launched and is has since become one of the most successfull aircraft in USA history.