What costs $1.5 trillion, doesn't work, and comes out of your paycheck?

[eridani]

If you guessed the F-35, you're right.

The F-35 is the most expensive weapon ever built. But according to a damning new article in Vanity Fair Magazine: It can't fly at night, can't fly in bad weather, and definitely cannot fight.1



http://act.truemajority.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=XC6XfXzoKLaISeqCKeXsXJ9dtfEMBs8Z

Mainstream media coverage of contractor abuse like the F-35 is rare. But it can be absolutely essential in our campaign to end these wasteful programs for good. When we were fighting to shut down the F-22 (another useless warplane that didn't work) a major news story about how the plane didn't work on CBS nightly news helped convinced President Obama to veto any spending bill that wasted more money on that needless warplane -- despite the lobbying of big weapons contractors.

Now its the F-35's turn, and this news story is already making big waves. None other than Sen. John McCain (who's usually only too happy to back bloated Pentagon spending) called out the F-35 program as "worse than a disgrace" and "still one of the great, national scandals that we have ever had, as far as the expenditure of taxpayers' dollars are concerned."

But not a lot of people read Vanity Fair every month for news about national security or the federal budget. So if we want to make sure Washington hears from people that the F-35 is as big a waste like this article shows that it is, we need to spread the word. Just click here to share the news on Facebook, Twitter or email.

Sincerely,
Ross Wallen

[sakabatou]

1. I bet there's more stuff that the War Machine produced that doesn't do shit.

[Scootaloo]

39. John McCain, for one example

[sakabatou]

40. DUzy

[MattSh]

46. There's only one thing a weapons program has to do to be considered a success.

And that's to suck money out of the US Treasury and the US taxpayer.

By that standard, the F-35 is a rousing success!

[steve2470]

2. k&r nt

[Fumesucker]

3. Well, I missed that one

I was thinking Congress.

[Flying Squirrel]

9. DUzy n/t

[Alkene]

4. Well, maybe if we spend all of our budget...

on weapons that don't work, perhaps the world will be just a little bit safer.

[truedelphi]

34. Can't decide if I like your reply or

Fumesucker's reply better.

Guess both are worthy of consideration.

[Festivito]

5. Yup, also, our 1.5T$ per year health care denial industry Repubs want back.

A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon it adds up to real money!

[xchrom]

6. du rec.

[Laelth]

7. k&r for exposure. n/t

-Laelth

[unhappycamper]

8. I've been posting threads in the Veterans forum about the F-35 for a long time now.

This POS costs around $243 million a pop.

Guess what the single most expensive piece of military hardware is. (Hint - The Navy is building it.)

[madokie]

11. Would that be this

U.S. Navy’s “Brand New” Aluminum Ship: Foiled by Seawater

[unhappycamper]

12. Nope - think BIIIIIIG

What pieces of military hardware currently being produced cost more than five billion dollars a pop?

[madokie]

13. Too early for me to think that big I guess

[unhappycamper]

14. I'll give you a hint:

Steath destroyers
Virginia-class submarines
Ford-class aircraft carrier

[NutmegYankee]

23. Virginia Class submarines are about half that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia-class_submarine

[unhappycamper]

47. I would suggest that wikipedia $$ for military stuff is way under priced.

According to wikipedia. how much does

* an F-22 cost? Time magazine reported $418 million a pop.
* a C-17 cost? Time magazine reported $320 million a pop.
* a B-2 cost? Numerous articles in military rags say $2.1 or $2.2 billion a pop.

Read thru the comments on http://www.dodbuzz.com/ .

[NutmegYankee]

48. Links please

I think you have Virginia Class mistaken with the Ohio Replacement Class, still in design, that is estimated at 5 billion.

[unhappycamper]

50. I have those number somewhere in my Journal.

I'll find them and post later.

[unhappycamper]

54. Rooting around in one's Journal is more difficult than I thought it would be.

Here's a TIME Magazine article on the cost of military jets. When I had originally posted the article Time said the F-22 cost $418 million a pop; now it's only $350 million.

http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1912203_1913321,00.html


Trying to find previously posted threads is more difficult than it should be. I need to rethink how to preserve the $$$ numbers in an easily accessible manner.

[Mopar151]

27. Aluminium??????

in salt spray? if the brass who approved that wer'nt high then, they need to start NOW.

[jmowreader]

49. Didn't anyone tell these dumbasses about the galvanic series?

What it says is, if you build a warship out of aluminum and moor it in a harbor next to a warship made out of steel, the steel warship will soon have a nice coating of aluminum below the waterline and what's left of the aluminum one will be lying on the bottom of the harbor.

[NuclearDem]

28. I thought it would've been that giant rail gun they're designing.

You know, in case the terrorists build a fleet of titanium-plated Death Stars.

[Warren DeMontague]

10. ...the drug war?

Oh, sorry, that's more to the tune of 60 Billion.

But it would appear the JSF is a boondoggle as well.

[bahrbearian]

15. Good thing we have the F-22 to fall back on.

Last edited Sat Sep 28, 2013, 02:44 PM - Edit history (1)

[7962]

16. Stop the F35, but the F22 DOES work and works well

Only in close-in dogfights does it become equal with other jets, but its very hard to GET close to an F22

[bahrbearian]

19. Your kidding me right, it works well?

The so-called ‘best fighter jet ever’ has never actually been tested in live combat, despite the US being in a near-constant state of war since it invaded Afghanistan in 2001. Most of the F-22 Raptor’s supposed combat advantages are, at this moment, entirely theoretical. http://rt.com/usa/f-22-problems-decade-112/

The Airframes http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/482198_.html

[dairydog91]

21. The F-22 is pointless.

If the U.S. is ever in a situation where it needs to send the F-22 against a comparable fifth-generation fighter, it will by definition be fighting a country capable of deploying that level of technology. All of those countries (Russia and China) have ICBMs, which means no head to head wars. Considering that the U.S. normally amuses itself by picking fights with third world countries with third-rate equipment, the F-22 is grossly overbuilt, as is the F-35.

[7962]

42. We've always fought against countries armed and flight trained by Russians

And usually against the F-whatever counterpart. Russia just released their next generation fighter. Dont think it wont end up in the middle east somewhere. China does the same thing. We just need to do a MUCH better job of making sure shit works before we spend a trillion bucks on it. Either that or continue to upgrade the F-15s and hope our better pilots continue to have the advantage.

[bahrbearian]

52. Where did they get the technology?

We are our own worst enemies we sell our technology$$ The f-15 for example.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

17. Worth noting that the article appears to be largely speculation.

I don't think that even a *working* fighter aircraft is a good use of $5000 per capita.

But the claims that it won't work appear to be ... probably exaggerated, to put it mildly...

[hughee99]

30. $5000 per capita? I think you missed a "carry the 1" somewhere. n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

31. I don't think so, although I may be wrong.

350 million = 3.5 x 10^8 people in the USA.
1.5 trillion = 1.5 * 10^12 dollars spent.

1.5 is about 3.5/2.

So about 10^4/2 = $5,000 per person.

Is there a mistake in there? I'm a mathematician, I don't use actual... you know, numbers and counting and vulgar stuff like that.... all that often.

[hughee99]

32. Sorry it was me. I'm the one who dropped the ball on "carrying the one".

I should learn to double-check before assuming I'm right.

[Romulox]

18. Look at it this way: Thank god it doesn't work, or they'd USE it. nt

[undeterred]

20. And you gotta have a war.

[libdem4life]

22. I may be naive, but which of our current foes has fighter planes to test it out on?

The Shiites, The Taliban, The Syrian Rebels ? Seems we'd have to pick a fight with someone closer to our own size who can afford fighter planes, and that's not likely to happen anytime soon.

[Junkdrawer]

24. We came a hair's breath from a US / Russia confrontation earlier this month....

Don't kid yourself. It's coming.

[libdem4life]

25. Oh my..like real fighters to shoot down, or war games antics-like buzzing each other...hadn't heard?

[Junkdrawer]

26. Like U.S. 6th Fleet vs. Russian Mediterranean Task Force...

http://www.examiner.com/article/possible-naval-showdown-u-s-6th-fleet-vs-russian-mediterranean-task-force

[earthside]

29. The point is ... redistribution of the wealth.

Working and middle class wealth is transferred to the corporate 'defense' elite and the retired officers cadre (i.e., 'retired' military officers now working for the 'defense' and 'national security' industries).

Whether or not the F-35 actually works is almost beside the point, what matters is funneling money to the military welfare class.

And ... the sad thing is that the MIC is so powerful and pervasive that Democratic and Repuglican national legislators hardly ever say no to this kind of wealth transfer.

[dairydog91]

33. A lot of it is middle-class to middle-class transfer.

Lots of that money went to paying the engineers, manufacturing workers, accountants, secretaries, so on and so forth. Doesn't make the spending "good", but it makes it damn difficult to shut down and incentivizes wild overspending.

[Incitatus]

35. It would be better for those engineers and manufacturers, etc to be rebuilding our infrastruicture.

And working on things like green energy and medical technology. $1.5 trillion would go a long way there. You do make a good point. It could be a tough transition, but keeping engineers and the rest working on machines of death and in this case a machine that could be useless for the sake of their jobs isn't the best idea.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

36. k&r n/t

[lastlib]

37. Every idiot supporting this boondoggle ought to read.....

Arthur C. Clarke's short story, "Superiority", in which one planet is defeated in a war by its enemy's inferior technology.

[blkmusclmachine]

38. Welfare for the MIC

Meanwhile, you'll get your Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid slashed to the bone.

[AlbertCat]

41. Don't we still make bombers to fight the USSR?

With an extra engine for each? (Imagine warehouses full of extra engines)


Didn't I read this somewhere?

[BlueJazz]

43. Wouldn't that be something like 3-4 thousand dollars for every person in the USA. ??

I rather could have used the money...rats.

[King_Klonopin]

44. There's only one solution: more cuts to the food stamp program.

What percentage of food stamp dollars turns out to be
"wasted money", do you suppose?

Now, what percentage of the $650 billion defense budget
turns out to be "wasted money"?

Answer: It depends ...

If you're a Republican, then 100% of the food stamp program
(and "welfare&quot is considered to be a HUGE waste of money,
while $1.5 trillion flushed down the MIC toilet is considered to be
no more than patriotic chump change.

Other folks may hold the opinion that we could cut the defense
budget by $200 billion, re-allocate the money to places where it
could be put to a better use, and never feel a pinch. But, in reality,
the MIC is just a government-protected racket for industries which
rake in trillions of dollars from the taxpayers.

F-35's, B-2 Bombers, F-22's, Patriot Missiles ...
it's all the same con game.

[steve2470]

45. "Bogdan suggested that pilots worried about being shot down should fly cargo aircraft instead"

In March 2013 USAF test pilots noted a lack of visibility from the F-35 cockpit during evaluation flights and said that this will get them consistently shot down in combat. Defense spending analyst Winslow Wheeler concluded from the flight evaluation reports that the F-35A "is flawed beyond redemption";[185] in response, program manager Bogdan suggested that pilots worried about being shot down should fly cargo aircraft instead.[186]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II#Concerns_over_performance_and_safety

Interesting response by Bogdan, to say the least.

[bighart]

51. My father worked for a military contractor back in the 70's

after 25 years in the service. The pay was really good but he ended up quitting because he couldn't stand being told to pass parts on to the military he knew were defective. He told me he had been on the other end receiving crap parts that they had to figure out how to make work and could not in good conscience be responsible for sending to the field.

[steve2470]

53. good for your dad, an honorable man ! nt