Your "F D R" is imaginary. Republicans, by lying us into the Iraq War alone, 1. seriously damaged the Constitution; 2. Killed hundreds of thousands of people; 3. Expanded government more than ever; 4. Evaded responsibility for one of the most damaging and expensive crimes of all time. Then there's a long list of other recent violations. And an even longer list of older violations.
You might be a Frederick Douglass something, but if you have any or all of those values then you're as much a "Republican" as you are a buddhist monk.
More Anonymous Republican Coward lies. The $TRILLIONS spent on actual bombing wars, like Iraq, Afghanistan, now Libya, and wars where the bombs are just an order away from launching, like N Korea, and bombing wars long ended but still spending, like Germany, Japan, the Philippines, and bombing wars we'd we keep on hold with the threat of more bombs, like Egypt/Israel... That's most of the military expense. Most of the "science and research" expense is spent on developing bombs.
Really you're just a liar. But the truth is so bad in so many ways that lies are all you've got.
Nobody's going to war over anything. Except to continue family tradition, as a last resort for paying for college or getting out of a jail sentence, or because they're really bored. And a praiseworthy few over patriotism, but nearly none of them over an imagined policy of totally nationalized taxes.
After all the shocking and game changing abuses by government over the past decade (and more, but especially the past decade), nobody's gone to war to protect the America that our government has deleted. The idea you just floated has been proven to be nothing but hot air.
There's some operations that can be outsourced to private operators. But their operations are strictly regulated by the government. Otherwise Yosemite and Yellowstone would quickly be locked up into private resorts, condos and mines that poorer people could never access.
We tried that in New York City for over a hundred years. It didn't work. Property burned all over the place, people died all over the place. Though insurance corps did make a lot of money.
That's why we have a Fire Department funded and operated by the public. Which works.
I wish extreme privateers would at least look at what's already been proven to fail before going around talking like the mayor of Sim City could run someplace real.
About $0.07:KWh in China, despite the whole country subsidizing the price through the Communist government. Just a little cheaper than in the US, where the $0.08:KWh national average is subsidized by part of our Capitalist government.
No, the money spent on military contractors is much more likely to be spent on foreign imported products and labor, rather than spent immediately in the economy on groceries and local sales clerks as social programmes are.
As has been demonstrated by you Republicans for generation after generation, cutting money to poor people is more certain to create a recession than is cutting military spending. That's why we're in the worst recession ever, despite the most spending on military programmes ever. Even the most overwhelming evidence cannot convince you Anonymous Teabagger Cowards to talk straight.
BTW, "programme" is a proper English spelling, that's distinguishable from the "program" that means "software". But I guess it's too "French" for you Teabaggers or something.
You're an Anonymous Coward. You will not put your name to your confession that the US military budget is nothing but an expensive jobs programme. Next time someone tells you that, you'll deny it. Republican.
Meanwhile it creates vastly fewer jobs than most social programmes. Social programmes support people close to poverty, while military contracts go to rich defense contractors.
You make it sound like the US military budget is the only element involving wasteful spending.
No I did not. I made it sound like the US military budget is the only one we are not cutting, while we are cutting budgets that directly protected women, children and old people.
You are arguing a straw man. Or nonsense. But since you're citing the Teabagger website, I'd expect nothing else. Meanwhile women, children and old people are left unprotected, and we have a new laser demo. Congratulations.
So what you mean is we've been spending money on this project for years. For something we don't need as much as old people need medicine. Yet we cut the medicine, and nothing that could even delay this laser system a year.
A target can fire bundles of chaff ahead of itself. Indeed there's probably a cheap way for the target to fire water scooped along the way out in front of itself, or just between the moving target and the stationary ship aiming its laser.
I'm not an "armchair quarterback". I'm a taxpayer. These lasers aren't armoring anyone. In fact they're stealing money from the armor budget you Republicans left unfunded for years, killing so many of our soldiers in the wars you insisted on starting, losing and never ending.
You sound more like a freeloader. A bloodthirsty one. The kind of Republican who refused to properly armor our troops after lying them into war in Iraq for 10 years, driving us to bankruptcy.
You are already as sick as possible without any help from me.
The laser is powered by vast quantities of fuel. Ballistics and rockets can be made and stored anywhere, but the fuel for lasers has to come from long global oil supply lines. Kevlar bags of water could multiply a ballistic (or rocket) arsenal without reloading from a land depot or supply ship.
And these are all expensive solutions to problems we don't really have. Certainly not the kinds of urgent (long overdue), important (essential) problems that we're cutting funding to elsewhere in the Federal budget, while protecting these fancy toys. Protecting them literally at all costs.
The point is not the value of these lasers. It's their value compared to the other stuff we're cutting instead of them. The lasers' value is lower, but we're still paying top dollar for them. Top dollar we don't have.
Reflective chaff is cheap and plentiful. Just use more chaff and the target is safe. The cost of chaff per laser power is an asymmetric defense that renders these lasers just another way to bankrupt the US. Which has been the defensive strategy of our enemies in the field for at least a decade now. And it's totally worked, while they remain in the same condition they started in, or better.
The only tech that can discharge enough energy fast enough (GW of power, even if briefly) is some kind of capacitor.
The US has been funding Star Wars "missile defense" for decades, for many $BILLIONS, but it has never actually worked. It has, however, often fraudulently rigged demos. "A positioning system capable of keeping up" isn't just a snap of the fingers, and it's eluded the Pentagon in targeting planes, missiles, tanks and every other kind of target. Even when based on land or in space, where rabid and unpredicted motion of the platform isn't making things twice as hard.
Even if it could reaim to a moving target, the time lost before hitting the target is all wasted energy. The energy delivered per shot is the limiting factor, after the olympian task of reaiming to get and stay on target.
And then the target just has to pump out chaff to deflect the beams, which is far cheaper and easier than hitting the target with a laser. Congratulations: another asymmetric threat to bankrupt and paralyze the US military up against foes with 20th Century gear and budgets.
I'm glad we didn't cut a penny from the 2011 military budget. Then we wouldn't have these extra boat lasers around that we don't need, along with all the thousands of other defense contractor welfare projects we've run up $TRILLIONS in debt to pay for.
Instead we cut 1% of the Federal budget, from women, children and the poor. Why protect them with social programmes when we can defend them with extra weapons that kill other people, or sit unused, instead?
Whatever they observed that makes no sense in their market models.
"There's no difference between theory and practice - in theory. In practice, there is." - Yogi Berra (paraphrase) Yogi learned that by practice, not theory.
Yet it hides other features. And crams in some other existing features in a way that's so inconsistent it's hard to find them again. There are too many clicks. Too many modes. Too much screen consumed by widgets not being used.
Just changing the mediocre Office GUI style to a different one with bigger buttons wasn't an advance. Dumbing down an already watered down interface wasn't an advance. It was all at best lateral, and a step away from consistency and what so many had already learned.
Slashdot Mirror
Your "F D R" is imaginary. Republicans, by lying us into the Iraq War alone, 1. seriously damaged the Constitution; 2. Killed hundreds of thousands of people; 3. Expanded government more than ever; 4. Evaded responsibility for one of the most damaging and expensive crimes of all time. Then there's a long list of other recent violations. And an even longer list of older violations.
You might be a Frederick Douglass something, but if you have any or all of those values then you're as much a "Republican" as you are a buddhist monk.
The AGI is indeed one way rich assholes don't pay their fair share, by having their AGI cooked down before taxes are counted against it.
What percentage of your simple gross income did you pay?
More Anonymous Republican Coward lies. The $TRILLIONS spent on actual bombing wars, like Iraq, Afghanistan, now Libya, and wars where the bombs are just an order away from launching, like N Korea, and bombing wars long ended but still spending, like Germany, Japan, the Philippines, and bombing wars we'd we keep on hold with the threat of more bombs, like Egypt/Israel... That's most of the military expense. Most of the "science and research" expense is spent on developing bombs.
Really you're just a liar. But the truth is so bad in so many ways that lies are all you've got.
Nobody's going to war over anything. Except to continue family tradition, as a last resort for paying for college or getting out of a jail sentence, or because they're really bored. And a praiseworthy few over patriotism, but nearly none of them over an imagined policy of totally nationalized taxes.
After all the shocking and game changing abuses by government over the past decade (and more, but especially the past decade), nobody's gone to war to protect the America that our government has deleted. The idea you just floated has been proven to be nothing but hot air.
You just did, and nobody in the government cares.
There's some operations that can be outsourced to private operators. But their operations are strictly regulated by the government. Otherwise Yosemite and Yellowstone would quickly be locked up into private resorts, condos and mines that poorer people could never access.
We tried that in New York City for over a hundred years. It didn't work. Property burned all over the place, people died all over the place. Though insurance corps did make a lot of money.
That's why we have a Fire Department funded and operated by the public. Which works.
I wish extreme privateers would at least look at what's already been proven to fail before going around talking like the mayor of Sim City could run someplace real.
About $0.07:KWh in China, despite the whole country subsidizing the price through the Communist government. Just a little cheaper than in the US, where the $0.08:KWh national average is subsidized by part of our Capitalist government.
Only a fool would say that. And you just did!
I bet there's a way to plow up water ahead of the target boat that's effective chaff against these lasers.
Your point has already been refuted by several others posting in this thread before you posted.
Since you're not capable of either reading or being nice, shut your fool mouth
No, the money spent on military contractors is much more likely to be spent on foreign imported products and labor, rather than spent immediately in the economy on groceries and local sales clerks as social programmes are.
As has been demonstrated by you Republicans for generation after generation, cutting money to poor people is more certain to create a recession than is cutting military spending. That's why we're in the worst recession ever, despite the most spending on military programmes ever. Even the most overwhelming evidence cannot convince you Anonymous Teabagger Cowards to talk straight.
BTW, "programme" is a proper English spelling, that's distinguishable from the "program" that means "software". But I guess it's too "French" for you Teabaggers or something.
The Federal budget is not 100% welfare from which 1% was just cut. The military budget is much closer to 100% welfare, yet nothing is cut.
You Teabaggers are the worst Republicans ever.
You're an Anonymous Coward. You will not put your name to your confession that the US military budget is nothing but an expensive jobs programme. Next time someone tells you that, you'll deny it. Republican.
Meanwhile it creates vastly fewer jobs than most social programmes. Social programmes support people close to poverty, while military contracts go to rich defense contractors.
No I did not. I made it sound like the US military budget is the only one we are not cutting, while we are cutting budgets that directly protected women, children and old people.
You are arguing a straw man. Or nonsense. But since you're citing the Teabagger website, I'd expect nothing else. Meanwhile women, children and old people are left unprotected, and we have a new laser demo. Congratulations.
So what you mean is we've been spending money on this project for years. For something we don't need as much as old people need medicine. Yet we cut the medicine, and nothing that could even delay this laser system a year.
That is not warranted.
A target can fire bundles of chaff ahead of itself. Indeed there's probably a cheap way for the target to fire water scooped along the way out in front of itself, or just between the moving target and the stationary ship aiming its laser.
I'm not an "armchair quarterback". I'm a taxpayer. These lasers aren't armoring anyone. In fact they're stealing money from the armor budget you Republicans left unfunded for years, killing so many of our soldiers in the wars you insisted on starting, losing and never ending.
You sound more like a freeloader. A bloodthirsty one. The kind of Republican who refused to properly armor our troops after lying them into war in Iraq for 10 years, driving us to bankruptcy.
You are already as sick as possible without any help from me.
The laser is powered by vast quantities of fuel. Ballistics and rockets can be made and stored anywhere, but the fuel for lasers has to come from long global oil supply lines. Kevlar bags of water could multiply a ballistic (or rocket) arsenal without reloading from a land depot or supply ship.
And these are all expensive solutions to problems we don't really have. Certainly not the kinds of urgent (long overdue), important (essential) problems that we're cutting funding to elsewhere in the Federal budget, while protecting these fancy toys. Protecting them literally at all costs.
The point is not the value of these lasers. It's their value compared to the other stuff we're cutting instead of them. The lasers' value is lower, but we're still paying top dollar for them. Top dollar we don't have.
Reflective chaff is cheap and plentiful. Just use more chaff and the target is safe. The cost of chaff per laser power is an asymmetric defense that renders these lasers just another way to bankrupt the US. Which has been the defensive strategy of our enemies in the field for at least a decade now. And it's totally worked, while they remain in the same condition they started in, or better.
The only tech that can discharge enough energy fast enough (GW of power, even if briefly) is some kind of capacitor.
The US has been funding Star Wars "missile defense" for decades, for many $BILLIONS, but it has never actually worked. It has, however, often fraudulently rigged demos. "A positioning system capable of keeping up" isn't just a snap of the fingers, and it's eluded the Pentagon in targeting planes, missiles, tanks and every other kind of target. Even when based on land or in space, where rabid and unpredicted motion of the platform isn't making things twice as hard.
Even if it could reaim to a moving target, the time lost before hitting the target is all wasted energy. The energy delivered per shot is the limiting factor, after the olympian task of reaiming to get and stay on target.
And then the target just has to pump out chaff to deflect the beams, which is far cheaper and easier than hitting the target with a laser. Congratulations: another asymmetric threat to bankrupt and paralyze the US military up against foes with 20th Century gear and budgets.
I'm glad we didn't cut a penny from the 2011 military budget. Then we wouldn't have these extra boat lasers around that we don't need, along with all the thousands of other defense contractor welfare projects we've run up $TRILLIONS in debt to pay for.
Instead we cut 1% of the Federal budget, from women, children and the poor. Why protect them with social programmes when we can defend them with extra weapons that kill other people, or sit unused, instead?
Whatever they observed that makes no sense in their market models.
"There's no difference between theory and practice - in theory. In practice, there is." - Yogi Berra (paraphrase)
Yogi learned that by practice, not theory.
Yet it hides other features. And crams in some other existing features in a way that's so inconsistent it's hard to find them again. There are too many clicks. Too many modes. Too much screen consumed by widgets not being used.
Just changing the mediocre Office GUI style to a different one with bigger buttons wasn't an advance. Dumbing down an already watered down interface wasn't an advance. It was all at best lateral, and a step away from consistency and what so many had already learned.
They want less government services for everyone else, and more for themselves. And not to pay for it.