Things That Will Never Be

because the State robbed you through taxation and inflation.

The cost of a single F-35 stealth fighter jet:

In February 2011, the Pentagon put a price of $207.6 million for each of the 32 aircraft to be acquired in FY2012

The United States intends to buy a total of 2,443 aircraft for an estimated US$323 billion, making it the most expensive defense program ever.[12] The United States Air Force (USAF) budget data in 2010, along with other sources, projects the F-35 to have a flyaway cost from US$89 million to US$200 million over the planned production of F-35s.[13][14][15]Cost estimates have risen to $382 billion for 2,443 aircraft, at an average of $156 million each. The rising program cost estimates have cast doubt on the actual number to be produced for the U.S. In January 2011, the F-35B variant was placed on “probation” for two years because of development problems. In February 2011, the Pentagon put a price of $207.6 million for each of the 32 aircraft to be acquired in FY2012, rising to $304.15 million ($9,732.8/32) if its share of RDT&E spending is included.[16][17]

207.6 million dollars represents the cost of material resources that were squandered on a single plane.

Because the State decided it needed a 208 million dollar fighter plane more than you needed to keep the fruits of your own labor:

832 quarter million dollar houses were not built.

5,777 college educations were not obtained.

6,500 fully loaded Honda Accords were not built.

60,836 GE Profile top-of-the-line refrigerators were not built.

83,200 Sony Bravia 46″ LCD TVs were not built.

208,000 Dell XPS 8300 computers were not built.

34,000,000 six dollar meals were not produced.

Now take all of those numbers and multiply them by 2,443 to see what the State intends on depriving you of, just from this SINGLE defense program.

Resources are limited things. When the State takes resources from the private sector economy to build fighter planes, it means those resources are not available to the private sector in order to produce the goods and services that keep us alive on a daily basis.

Every time a defense contractor hires an engineer to produce a weapons system, it means that engineer is not available to an air conditioning corporation to develop better air conditioning units.

Every time a defense contractor buys steel to produce a jet engine, it means that steel is not available to an auto maker to produce better and cheaper cars.

The State is the destroyer of life. The State is the destroyer of resources. The State is bane of human existence. The State produces nothing and provides us nothing that we ourselves could not produce freely on our own.

How is it possible that a rag-tag band of rebels in the mountains of Afghanistan, armed only with makeshift AK-47s and homemade bombs, are able to cause the greatest military in the world to expend more resources on combating them than the US spent fighting an army of communist Viet Cong?

Could it be that a huge military is not necessary to combat an invading army if the people are willing to engage in guerrilla warfare against an occupying force? How is it possible that Afghani goat herders and sandal footed Vietnamese peasants were able to thwart the greatest military presence on the face of the Earth?

Why did the US Constitution establish militias as the basis of our defense forces? Why did the founders of this tyrannical nation State say that a standing army was a dangerous threat to liberty?

Perhaps they saw the effectiveness of an armed population and the waste that accompanies military spending. Perhaps they saw that no army in the world can subjugate a population that refuses to engage in direct military warfare and instead engages in guerrilla based harassment. Perhaps they wanted more housing, clothing and food instead of an unnecessary military defense force.

When the State spends money, it is just as bad as if the State took that money right out of your pocket book. We must remember that printing money does not cause more material resources to spring into existence. We must remember that taking money from people by threats or force can not produce more abundance than leaving that money in the hands of those who actually produce.

The free market, which is nothing more that people voluntarily trading the fruits of their own labor with each other, will always meet the needs of consumers. If free people want an education, the market will provide one. If free people want a house, the market will provide one. The State can not cause more education, healthcare or houses to spring into existence by holding a gun to rich people’s heads without simultaneously causing equally important goods to never be produced. However, the State CAN take your money and hand it to rich people through bailouts, crony business deals, contracts, subsidies, and no-risk loans; thereby ensuring the rich get richer while the poor get poorer.

The State is not your friend.

The State is coercion.

The State is evil incarnate.

Stop supporting it.

reply to post by mnemeth1


YES! NICE post. I love the numbers. One plane is the equivalent of 3,120,000,000 months of WoW. Sad day. :'(
Nice post again.

When it comes to the military-industrial complex, it's not about winning anything. It's about $$$$$$$$$$

If destroying the world could be proven to be a profitable experience, there are people in this world who would do their damn best to try to pull it off.

As it is, all they have to do now is keep the fires burning and the $$$$$$$$$$$$ keep rolling in.

It's insane, but a lot of people have bought into it.

Not to forget to mention that if approved this will employ a thousand or so Americans and keep them employed solidly for quite a few years.

Another thing that will never be is any other nation's aircraft superior to our's for decades because of the F35..

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Not to forget to mention that if approved this will employ a thousand or so Americans and keep them employed solidly for quite a few years.

Jobs are created by people, not the State.

You can create a job by planting potatoes in your back yard and selling them.

You can create a job by building dog houses and selling them.

The market creates jobs.

People have wants and needs, and when people produce things to fulfill those needs, jobs are created.

The State must destroy jobs before it can "create" them. It must rob people of their wealth before it can spend it on the weapons of war. It must take lead from battery manufacturers before it can hand the lead over to bullet makers.

Originally posted by 35Foxtrot
Another thing that will never be is any other nation's aircraft superior to our's for decades because of the F35..

Because we are going to be invaded by... who?

I guess multiple aircraft carriers and nuclear ballistic missile submarines just aren't enough!

We need super fighters to prevent imaginary foes from violating our precious bodily fluids!

Originally posted by 35Foxtrot
Another thing that will never be is any other nation's aircraft superior to our's for decades because of the F35..

And I think that's a valid consideration. One of the most important duties of the federal government is to provide for national defense. Its certainly true that our air force is a match for any in the world, but we didn't reach this point by being complacent. For better or worse, modernization of the military is a never-ending cycle. I don't necessarily have a problem with the government spending to acquire a next generation fighter aircraft.

reply to post by mnemeth1


Show me one entity that has willingly created jobs in the last 5 yrs? There has been none.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by 35Foxtrot
Another thing that will never be is any other nation's aircraft superior to our's for decades because of the F35..

Because we are going to be invaded by... who?

I guess multiple aircraft carriers and nuclear ballistic missile submarines just aren't enough!

We need super fighters to prevent imaginary foes from violating our precious bodily fluids!

That's exactly the point. No one is considering invading us because of our superiority.

Aircraft carriers only carry the aircraft to the target zone, the aircraft do the actual flying to the specific target. A very dangerous flight. Keeping way ahead of anything else out there means none of our guys buy the farm. In regards to the ballistic subs; surely you are not advocating a nuclear response when a old style airstrike or cruise missile would suffice. In addition, establishing air superiority in a given area denies that airspace to enemy aircraft who will paste our ground units the first chance they get.

We need super fighters to prevent very real foes from killing our precious pilots and soldiers/seamen/marines.

Originally posted by 35Foxtrot

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by 35Foxtrot
Another thing that will never be is any other nation's aircraft superior to our's for decades because of the F35..

Because we are going to be invaded by... who?

I guess multiple aircraft carriers and nuclear ballistic missile submarines just aren't enough!

We need super fighters to prevent imaginary foes from violating our precious bodily fluids!

That's exactly the point. No one is considering invading us because of our superiority.

Aircraft carriers only carry the aircraft to the target zone, the aircraft do the actual flying to the specific target. A very dangerous flight. Keeping way ahead of anything else out there means none of our guys buy the farm. In regards to the ballistic subs; surely you are not advocating a nuclear response when a old style airstrike or cruise missile would suffice. In addition, establishing air superiority in a given area denies that airspace to enemy aircraft who will paste our ground units the first chance they get.

We need super fighters to prevent very real foes from killing our precious pilots and soldiers/seamen/marines.

edit on 27/10/11 by 35Foxtrot because: (no reason given)

No one is considering invading us because we have a fleet of ballistic missile subs and we could turn their country into glass inside of 10 minutes.

The US could have absolutely no military or police force beyond that sub fleet and still never have to worry about being invaded.

On top of the missile boats, there are 60 million gun owners in this country. A number which dwarfs any army in the world, including our own.

reply to post by mnemeth1


So, just to be clear, you ARE advocating nuclear responses to non-nuclear/WMD attacks on the U.S.? I'm not ready to do that. That may be why we're talking past each other.

The subs won't make much of a difference without air superiority. Same holds true for all us gun owners. An assault rifle loses every time to even the simplest air to ground weapon loadout.

Originally posted by 35Foxtrot
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

So, just to be clear, you ARE advocating nuclear responses to non-nuclear/WMD attacks on the U.S.? I'm not ready to do that. That may be why we're talking past each other.

The subs won't make much of a difference without air superiority. Same holds true for all us gun owners. An assault rifle looses every time to even the simplest air to ground weapon loadout.

To fend off an invasion fleet - absolutely.

Another country will simply not "attack" us out of the clear blue if we are not posing a danger to them, refusing to trade with them, or otherwise messing with their internal affairs.

And those subs don't require any air superiority to operate. They are completely stealth and undetectable. If they don't want to be found, nothing on this planet will find them.

Of course, I'm advocating no 'State' government at all. I want private defense forces to take over maintaining the sub fleet and national defense. A private defense force would operate the minimum number of military weapons to keep the nation secure from an attack and to repel any potential invasion.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by 35Foxtrot
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

So, just to be clear, you ARE advocating nuclear responses to non-nuclear/WMD attacks on the U.S.? I'm not ready to do that. That may be why we're talking past each other.

The subs won't make much of a difference without air superiority. Same holds true for all us gun owners. An assault rifle looses every time to even the simplest air to ground weapon loadout.

To fend off an invasion fleet - absolutely.

Another country will simply not "attack" us out of the clear blue if we are not posing a danger to them, refusing to trade with them, or otherwise messing with their internal affairs.

And those subs don't require any air superiority to operate. They are completely stealth and undetectable. If they don't want to be found, nothing on this planet will find them.

OK. I'm not ready to go nuke when we could surgically remove an enemy and/or it's ability to attack us. We'll agree to disagree.

And, sorry to let you down and shatter the feel-good outlook, but enemies are out there that hate us for no other reason than we are what we are and live the way we do. That doesn;t even include the true crazies out there.

I'm not saying the subs would be unable to operate without air superiority, I'm saying they would be of limited use against an enemy with air superiority (short of going nuclear, which I am not ready to do while other options exist - which it is now clear is the reason we differ in our opinions).

Besides, the cost of updating our nuclear ballistic missile subs to keep them a generation (at least) ahead of any possible enemy to the same update schedule as aircraft makes your main argument kinda moot, no? If you want to rely on those subs, their "stealth," and their missiles, you'll need to keep all of that ahead of everyone else as well.

And, history shows that reliance on one weapon system/strategy will fail. You need a combined arms and multi-layered defense.

EDIT:
OK. I didn't see your edit to your above post:

"Of course, I'm advocating no 'State' government at all. I want private defense forces to take over maintaining the sub fleet and national defense. A private defense force would operate the minimum number of military weapons to keep the nation secure from an attack and to repel any potential invasion."

before I posted my reply. I agree that private companies, in general, do any job better than the federal gov't. I just don't know that I'm ready to cede control of WMDs/nukes to a private corporation.

Actually, I think you're both right, to a degree..

We do need the best stuff we can afford, at the same time, we spend entirely too much.

Bring the troops home. Surgical strikes are where it's at.

Wouldn't, like, 800 of those planes be aplenty?

Just my two cents

While I agree to a basic return to some of our ideals....

Why did the US Constitution establish militias as the basis of our defense forces? Why did the founders of this tyrannical nation State say that a standing army was a dangerous threat to liberty?

That's easy to state when a farmer's musket is just as much of a threat as a soldier's musket.
However, these days, the average citizen doesn't have anything to equate to a Stealth fighter or Tank, or Cruise Missile, etc. and since we must defend against others, a standing army is the only way to go in modern times.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

5,777 college educations were not obtained.

With the massive tuition increases fed by the student loan scam, this number will be decreasing by the day. Pretty soon a college education will cost as much as an f35 and probably would be just as worthless.

Anyhow the purpose of the defense industry is not to defend as it was in times of yore, but the purpose is to sustain itself. Cutting any expensive military program will deny thousands of people jobs in some district with a powerful congressman and in a state with a powerful senator. Furthermore it will deny massive profits to the lobbyists making and servicing such a program.

reply to post by 35Foxtrot


The armed citizenry of the United States combined with an effective and modernized nuclear force is all the combined arms needed.

The only problem would be that it would be harder for OUR government to control the population.

Jets like the F35 are dinosaurs with the new drones coming out and the long and accurate ranges of missiles. In fact most military equipment are dinosaurs. The only purpose is to enrich lobbyists.