What is Digg?198 Comments
- Pocky, on 10/12/2007, -12/+48For the people knocking Bush about this, you should note that these Helicopters are not intended to go into service until at least 2009. Bush will not be flying in these.
- Alphabet, on 10/12/2007, -42/+716.1 BILLION? what a waste of money. They're making 23 helicopters, which means each helicopter is worth more than 260million. HOLY *****.
So let me get this right. This year, they cut:
education spending, environment safety spending, transportation, science cuts(nasa barely has enough money to run now. They had to cut several of their programs), social security, infant & children's nutrition program, early-childhood education, home ownership program, health safety spending, and army corps....
But they decide to spend 6.1 billion on 23 helicopters?
Worst.President.Ever - strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -21/+48"$6 Billion with a B Dollars is nothing?
Spoken like a Republican spending my tax dollars."
No, you fool. It's nothing only when related to the national debt. Throwing $6.1 billion at the national debt is pointless.
Long term extensive government cuts, across the board, is what it will take to make a real dent (and no, raising taxes isn't the answer, sorry). - strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29Compare the deficits of other countries to their GDP and then get back to me. Thanks.
Start here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt - joeyjojo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+27"I wish I owned the government"
Do you vote? ;o) - strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -28/+47$6.1 billion? That's nothing. That's like 2 days of interest. Like spitting into the ocean.
- kremvax, on 10/12/2007, -45/+60$6 Billion with a B Dollars is nothing?
Spoken like a Republican spending my tax dollars.
That would buy us 3 more weeks in Iraq.
Or armor for the 150k soldiers stationed there.
It would have fixed the levees in New Orleans.
Or it would buy a sweet ride so the president doesn't have to walk from airforce one to the motorcade anymore. - TopherT, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Deficits mean nothing to those in power, its like free money to them. They don't realize that the people buying are bonds might eventually need that money back. China is pumping money into our bonds so that our markets for their goods don't collapse. Once they make enough money doing this (many of their buisnesses are directly connected to the state) they'll start focusing on domestic markets and leave the US to rot, and believe me, it will.
- cybortrip, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14OMG.
"For the people knocking Bush about this, you should note that these Helicopters are not intended to go into service until at least 2009. Bush will not be flying in these."
>>>>Pocky - if an idiot president buys helicopters does it necessarily matter who they are for? he's still an idiot. this guy has destroyed our budget. and what did he do recently so it doesnt look so bad? increased the spending limit. he is one of THE MOST FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE presidents of our time, maybe even of all time. - stringycheese, on 10/12/2007, -25/+36"Long term extensive government cuts, across the board, is what it will take to make a real dent (and no, raising taxes isn't the answer, sorry)."
How about starting the budget cuts by eliminating unneccesary expenditures like these helicopters? - MrStylz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13I hope your realize when making that extensive list that the F-16's sold to other countries are NOT the same in use by the United States. Yes, they may use the same airframe and engines, but the USA has improved avianics, radar, and armarment. There is still an advantage. In addition, a lot of foreign air forces get USA's used aircraft...of course stripped of all that is sensitive. Not to mention that we have a lot of the best fighter pilots in the world, which helps too.
- Pplus, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16"This will merely give Dubya a small measure of gratification when he next flies off to his ranch for a session of brush cutting and mountainbiking."
Yea, good point, only try reading the article. They don't go into service until 2009 jackass, which means as much as everyone would love it to be, it is not some arbitrary decision made by George Bush because he wants a new toy. He will never even ride in one. It must be incredibly convenient to be able to believe that there are just a group of "people" that run the country making bad decisions and there is nothing you will ever be able to do about it. The problem is it's also incredibly naive and lazy.
As far as your other point, a lot of people thought going to the moon was a waste of money too, and some still do. What they don't realize is that almost every significant scientific breakthrough of the past 40ish years has to do with something we learned in the course of going to the moon. So yes, spending money on new technology does lead to progress. - sumrandommember, on 10/12/2007, -2/+122.2 billion for ONE B2. 6.1 billion for TWENTY-THREE helicopters or about 265 million for one
- joeyjojo, on 10/12/2007, -21/+30"well then lets remove social security"
Or maybe let's stop the war? Or maybe stop corporate welfare? Or...there's a billion things we could stop spending money on. The (very) modest retirement income of our citizens shouldn't be one of them. - burke, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12>And you could have given the money you spent on that computer to charity
Sure, we could have, but here's the difference. That's MY money. The government is spending $6.1B of YOUR (I'm Canadian) money on helicopters, - JasonPrini, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8When a government sells bonds, it's financing it's debt right. So if you have 200% Debt to GDP ratio, as long as most of the debt is held domestically, I understand that's not a huge problem.
The problem starts when the portion of foreign-owned debt starts to rise. If you have 200% Debt to GDP, but 150% is owned by another country, they can come knocking any day for their money. Which would be bad. - Habemus, on 10/12/2007, -11/+18>This year, they cut:
>education spending, environment safety spending, transportation,
>science cuts(nasa barely has enough money to run now. They
>had to cut several of their programs), social security, infant & children's
>nutrition program, early-childhood education, home ownership program,
>health safety spending, and army corps....
All those things had an increase in spending this year. Especially transportation. If you didn't notice while you were posting your spittle-laced diatribe, the transportation bill that was recently passed was one of the largest pork-laden spending bills ever. NASA has plenty of money, it's just the money they have is being sucked in to the bottomless rat-hole that is the Shuttle and ISS. Folks on SS got the "buy-your-vote" free prescription bill. And so forth. - syberghost, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8When we catch up with Canada, I'll worry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt
Or France. Or Germany. - curmudgeon7205, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Most seemed to miss the fact that the dollars mentioned are for modernizing the entire FLEET of helicopters (23 or more) in the Marine Squadron HMX-1. HMX-1 is tasked with providing all helicopter transportation for the President, Vice President, members of the President's Cabinet, and foreign dignitaries. HMX-1 also provides all helicopter emergency evacuation support. They MUST be extremely reliable and involve redundancies we probably don't even know about.
"If a knee jerks in the woods, would anyone notice?" - mirunit, on 10/12/2007, -18/+24All the money illegal immigrants dont pay in taxes (the undocumented ones) would pay for the Iraqi war for 4 years, you dont understand how much money is spend on social security, it is like 2-3 times what is spent on domestic and foreign defence.
The point is social secuirty was put in place back in the great depression, it is out of date. Keep disability and welfare because they help people who cant help themselves. We have 401ks and roth IRAs to replace social secuirty. - pad22, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Things get old. If you don't replace them eventually, even though you could still keep repairing them and keep them in working condition, it'll cost more to keep fixing them up than it would to buy new ones.
This is just how the world works. Fact of life. - TopherT, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9The sole foreign customer for the Tomcat was the Imperial Iranian Air Force (IIAF) during the reign of the Shah of Iran. Due to the F-14's cost, lack of ground attack capacity, and the US government's preference to champion the F-15 for export, it was an unpopular export aircraft.
This unpopular aircraft still was purchased by Iran, about 80 units.
The F-15 is also operated by Israeli Air Force (F-15 and F15I Thunder), Japan Air Self-Defence Force (F-15J, F-15DJ) and Royal Saudi Air Force (F-15C, F-15S). In May 2005, Singapore made the decision of replacing its fleet of outdated A-4 Skyhawks with the F-15SG. Negotiations for contract signing are still underway. A special version of the F-15E, the F-15K has been ordered by South Korea, with final assembly of the first example beginning in June, 2004. It will be the first to sport twin F110-GE engines from General Electric, with additional thrust. All previous F-15s had engines from Pratt and Whitney.
Operators of the F-16 Fighting Falcon
Total delivered or on order as of 2005:
* United States Air Force: 2507 (some sold to other countries)
* United States Navy: 40
* Other air forces: 2401
o Royal Bahraini Air Force: 22
o Belgian Air Force: 160
o Chilean Air Force: 10 18
o Danish Air Force: 78
o Egyptian Air Force: 220
o Hellenic Air Force: 170
o Royal Jordanian Air Force: 24
o Indonesian Air Force: 10
o Israeli Air Force: 382
o Italian Air Force: 34
o Royal Netherlands Air Force: 213
o Royal Norwegian Air Force: 72
o Royal Oman Air Force: 12
o Pakistan Air Force: 40
o Polish Air Force: 48
o Portuguese Air Force: 45
o Republic of Singapore Air Force: 60
o Republic of China (Taiwan) Air Force: 150
o Republic of Korea Air Force(ROKAF): 180
o Royal Thai Air Force: 61
o Turkish Air Force: 240
o United Arab Emirates Air Force: 80
o Venezuelan Air Force: 24 - stringycheese, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11The problem is that you vote for people and once they are in office they pretty much do whatever they want. What they need to do allow the general public to vote on expenditures like this.
If the government let the people vote on these things then we probably wouldn't see $300 billion "pre-emptive" wars or totally unnecessary $6 billion pimped out helicopters. - syberghost, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10I'm going to say this louder, since you seem to have missed it:
BUSH WILL NEVER SEE ONE OF THESE. THEY GO INTO SERVICE AFTER HE LEAVES OFFICE. - dbalaski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm kinda pissed about Lockheed Martin getting the contract over Sikorsky..
Lockheed bought a European Helicopter MFG, and built an Assmebly Plant in upstate New York.. So the president of the USA is going to be flying around in a helicopter that is not Made here, only assembled here.
Says a lot for our internal industry -- but then again, what should I expect... - CosmicJustice, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Does anyone RTFA before commenting? It's for a fleet of 23 helicopters.
- marm0lade, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Bush IS NOT going to get the new helicopters. I dn how many times this has to be said.....
- bmcnally, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9I love how people think that this is going to be a Bush-exclusive helicopter "OMG TEH PREZIDENT IS TEH N00B!!!"
These things stay around for several presidencies, if you read the article you'll notice that has been several administrations since the last upgrade. Average the $6.1 billion over 15 years or so, and you have a lot less money being spent on this. Our elected representatives have more pork projects than what this will actually cost us. - DuNzTaR, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6That's not about just saying "remove social security," and in a couple of months is all settled... No. Is not like that, and you probably know that is not like that. Why are we not in the Great Depression? Because of all these organizations and ideas that were set up to maintain the country out of crisis. Now you say, get rid of social security when the country is already in dept, so getting rid of Social Security, if the country suffers another depression, which is not something that is bizarre since ANYBODY over the age of 18 can get credit, you are looking at the same depression happening all over again. The point is to not repeat history, is to make it different. In addition to that, nobody wants to go on strike because the social security that came out of their paycheck is now being thrown away because the country "needed" that it. Its the government that got in this chaos, not it's people.
- camiller, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4There was just a piece on one of the evening news shows about how the protective gear situation has been addressed. All of the protective gear they need is there. The show went on to say that as many as 80% of them simply don't wear it because it is uncomfortable/hot but that is a different issue.
- tonage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Doesn't matter how many times you say it. These Bushaphobes cannot even comment on a cool machine without hijacking the thread to spread their bias propoganda.
- mirunit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5woah I did not know Japan has a 170% GCP/debt ratio 0_o. The US is ~64% and China is ~28%.
- tonage, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Or maybe a strong military is the reason we have not been attacked more often. Du.
- Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4removing social security would create a great depression.
- strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7They're not just buying one. RTFA.
- jimmiem, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9Ha, it's funny to see this story on Digg. The helicopters are being built in my home town (Owego, NY). I'm happy that there's some money flowing into the local economy. I think that many of you ignore that this type of spending actually puts Americans to work and that can be just as important as many of the other things you suggest the money be used for. It created over 700 jobs in a town of about 5000-6000 people, and yes, a large percentage of those jobs will actually go to local people and not just straight-out-of-college engineers being imported from around the country.
- cybortrip, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4LMAO
"All the money illegal immigrants dont pay in taxes (the undocumented ones) would pay for the Iraqi war for 4 years, you dont understand how much money is spend on social security, it is like 2-3 times what is spent on domestic and foreign defense."
>>>>murunit - i'd love to see evidence of your illegal immigrants statement... but anyway regarding social security uhh... dont forget the government has stolen money from the social security fund from the get go and rather than putting the money back (*****, even w/o interest would be fantastic) they are saying its dead in the water and basically we're screwed out of social security because the government stole our money. yet when WE steal from a bank, we get put behind bars because its a federal crime. the federalis are above the law and above the people they serve. hypocrisy at its finest. - camiller, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Since these won't be phased in until 2009 Bush won't be it's primary occupant.
- tmiller51, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Wow, complaining about how much money the goverment spends gets a person labeled an "America Hater". My how far the Republicans have fallen.
- chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9If you read the article, you'd know that the President already has a fleet of helicopters, but they are "notoriously cramped". So he can get around just fine, but they see a need to make it more comfortable for him, that is why they are spending the money. This has nothing to do with the president getting around, it has to do with fiscal responsibility. Sure, $6.1 billion isn't that much compared to the total national budget for this year- but don't you think there are many other pointless things the government is wasting money on?
We are not retarded. - 3rdMEgo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7@strictnein
Thanks for that list, I can see myself using that quite a bit in the future to combat the America haters.
/and apparently Honk Kong knows what's up - TopherT, on 10/12/2007, -11/+14Yes I do, and look at all the good its done me. Voting isn't control.. Well it is but not the way you think. Voting gives the impression of control in order to legitimize the people who actually make the decisions. Lobbyists.
- Jeebugorn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6where does this no-body armor crap come from? it USED to be an issue when the war first started. there is no shortage of armor anymore. if it was, they why do i see EVERY BASIC TRAINEE wearing brand new body armor? also....the armor will stop bullets......how many soldiers died lately from being shot from lack of body armor?? zero. they are dying from IEDs/VBIEDs. no amount of body armor will stop those. ALSO....before you mention it...the humvees MAY be getting up-armored doors/windshields....but that doesnt stop the shrapnel from coming through the engine block/dash where there is no armor. and most units take the doors off the humvees anyway, so that they can get out of the humvee quicker.
onto the new helicopters for the president. guess what, whenever you get elected into the most powerful position in the world, you can spend you money on "the defecit" or whatever you want. until then, if G-Dub wants new helicopters....then he's going to get helicopters. he wanted a war, he got a war. see how this works? - joeyjojo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7"The problem is that you vote for people and once they are in office they pretty much do whatever they want."
Yes and no. It really does depend on who you vote for, of course, and, many voters are ignorante voters.
"If the government let the people vote on these things then we probably wouldn't see $300 billion "pre-emptive" wars or totally unnecessary $6 billion pimped out helicopters."
True. If you let people vote on everything, we wouldn't also have a functioning government. Most folks do NOT vote in their best interests and are easily swayed by what they thing is right/wrong from a very selfish POV. It's human nature, of course. - linuxinternet, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4that humidor would sure be sweet though. specially if it had one of those red scrambler telephones in it!
- TopherT, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_spending
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_deficit (look at graph for US balance of trade)
External debt is growing in this country, ever since Regan this country has been a net borrower. Don't for a second believe that this is good for us. Every time you go to wall mart you throw the situation just that much further out of whack. This century will be the Chinese century. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8------------------ SOOOOOO Wrong ------------- I don't care what president it is. There is just something fundamentally wrong when a president has to arm himself up with 3 billion plus dollars worth of defenses and armory. That's a fundamental problem with the presidency and the public. People should love what America stands for and appreciate the service of the president who works FOR US. The fact that this whole post is FULL of bashing any president is JUST WRONG. Why don't people start voting for REAL HARDWORKING HONEST AND INTELLIGENT BLUE COLLAR WORKERS instead of Senators and lawyers and kids who ride Daddy's coattails!!!
- nene7070, on 10/12/2007, -6/+91. 23 helicopters. its a fleet.
2. He WONT see it (yes i know syberghost just said that, just reiterating :) - ryandbrimhall, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Why dont you read syberghost's comment and wise up a bit.
- TopherT, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3OK, so because I enjoy other freedoms you feel that I'm being ungracious to a man who secured none of them and had been cited many times by the ACLU as actually corroding them? I should be so gracious that I can't question purchases involving enough money to buy every retail item I've seen in my entire life? At least I use the advantages that free speech offers in order to protect it and myself. You and all your flag waving friends sit by and let the government go further corrupt itself and worse, attack anyone who tries to keep the government honest. You really are the worst kind of citizen.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 196 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is