The problem is the government (Congress & the President) seem incapable of making ANY hard choices. They haven't agreed on (passed) a budget in years. Thus the sequestration.
No More Public AirShows
- Thread starter sarahann
- Start date
Luigi59
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2007
- Messages
- 4,566
Spending over $110 million dollars (annual cost of Blue Angels, Thunderbirds is probably similar) is not priceless, it has a price, indeed.
Christcorp
15-Year Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2008
- Messages
- 5,381
Official air shows like the thunderbirds and blue angels definitely cost money. Does that money "Net" a return? I think it does, but I'm not in charge of determining what money is used for what. Flyovers and such, are a different category. Many times, a flyover doesn't really cost anything, because they are usually coordinated with scheduled flying training hours. In other words, the pilots need to fly "X" amount of hours anyway, so flying over a football stadium or something similar isn't really costing.
Now; that's not to say that there's going to be a reduction in training hours in the air. I'm sure there will be some cutting back. But they can't totally eliminated training time in the air. That isn't really "Discretionary" spending. Sort of like the electric bill for your office; fuel for your vehicles; telephone bill; etc... These aren't discretionary. They are required expenditures.
I'm not dogging the president, even though some here think I am every time I bring him up. But the sequester allows quite a bit of flexibility on what money is spent on and what isn't. And the truth is; which many people are starting to learn and that it's not total doom and gloom and some would have us think; that the reduction in spending is actually just a reduction in growth. Not actual spending. In other words, our debt simply won't GROW as much as it would WITHOUT the sequester. But we're STILL growing the debt.
But there's a lot of places money can be cut back. Unfortunately, there's too many people who are using this sequester for POLITICAL Reasons and Gain. When food stamps can be ACCEPTED at a liquor store, that's a problem. The sequester for this year only requires a savings of $85 BILLION. $57 BILLION is spent on foreign aid; which is only about 1% of the budget; but that alone could take care of the majority of sequester requirements.
The bottom line is; we are $16 TRILLION dollars in debt. The sequester requires a savings of a little of $1 TRILLION dollars over a 10 year period. The amount of money in question is little to almost NOTHING. There's a lot of SCARE Tactics going on to make people believe there's going to be all this unemployment. People losing jobs. Kids not getting the education they should. Sorry; but it's all B.S. All of these things are probably going to happen, but it's not because of the sequester. It's because some in government like to SPEND, SPEND, SPEND; and their only method to get that money is to TAX, TAX, TAX.
If they truly wanted to save money; which many don't; how about NOT paying contractors for work they didn't do? How about not paying contractors twice for the SAME WORK? How about not spending $27 million on "Pottery Classes". How about HUD not giving a half million dollar grant to a company to develop pet shampoo? Or a MILLION dollar grant to study the sexual attraction of fruit flies.
The list goes on and on and on and on. Each of these sound so small, but when you realize and don't rationalize that there are HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of these types of grants and programs; you realize that there are literally BILLIONS of dollars being spent. And this isn't even getting into the waste of "Entitlement Programs".
When cuts have to come, politicians automatically gravitate to the biggest spenders. Unfortunately, out of the 4 biggest spenders; defense, social security, education, and social services, 2 of the 3 means VOTES!!! And politicians won't try and cut, reduce, or even try and find WASTE THERE. They always go after defense. Yes, I'm pissed at the White House AND at congress. Both parties; ALL the politicians.
With the amount of money we are taxed, through income, fuel, import/export, Social Security, medicare/caid, etc... We would have MORE than enough for all the required spending, if we would simply STOP spending money on all the B.S. grants and programs. See, the problem is, MOST AMERICANS don't know what the government spends their money on. If you look at the BREAK DOWN, military, social programs, education, space program, Highways, agriculture, and all the other IMPORTANT THINGS; at the bottom of the tally, there's another block that says: "ALL OTHER: 22%". That means that more than 1/5th of all the money we take in, is used for stuff that really isn't that important. But it gets votes. It get's PACs. Instead of "ALL OTHER", it should show the breakdown of the first 75-80% with important, albeit debatable expenditures, then it should show 20-25% as POLITICAL BULL SH**.
Now; that's not to say that there's going to be a reduction in training hours in the air. I'm sure there will be some cutting back. But they can't totally eliminated training time in the air. That isn't really "Discretionary" spending. Sort of like the electric bill for your office; fuel for your vehicles; telephone bill; etc... These aren't discretionary. They are required expenditures.
I'm not dogging the president, even though some here think I am every time I bring him up. But the sequester allows quite a bit of flexibility on what money is spent on and what isn't. And the truth is; which many people are starting to learn and that it's not total doom and gloom and some would have us think; that the reduction in spending is actually just a reduction in growth. Not actual spending. In other words, our debt simply won't GROW as much as it would WITHOUT the sequester. But we're STILL growing the debt.
But there's a lot of places money can be cut back. Unfortunately, there's too many people who are using this sequester for POLITICAL Reasons and Gain. When food stamps can be ACCEPTED at a liquor store, that's a problem. The sequester for this year only requires a savings of $85 BILLION. $57 BILLION is spent on foreign aid; which is only about 1% of the budget; but that alone could take care of the majority of sequester requirements.
The bottom line is; we are $16 TRILLION dollars in debt. The sequester requires a savings of a little of $1 TRILLION dollars over a 10 year period. The amount of money in question is little to almost NOTHING. There's a lot of SCARE Tactics going on to make people believe there's going to be all this unemployment. People losing jobs. Kids not getting the education they should. Sorry; but it's all B.S. All of these things are probably going to happen, but it's not because of the sequester. It's because some in government like to SPEND, SPEND, SPEND; and their only method to get that money is to TAX, TAX, TAX.
If they truly wanted to save money; which many don't; how about NOT paying contractors for work they didn't do? How about not paying contractors twice for the SAME WORK? How about not spending $27 million on "Pottery Classes". How about HUD not giving a half million dollar grant to a company to develop pet shampoo? Or a MILLION dollar grant to study the sexual attraction of fruit flies.
The list goes on and on and on and on. Each of these sound so small, but when you realize and don't rationalize that there are HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of these types of grants and programs; you realize that there are literally BILLIONS of dollars being spent. And this isn't even getting into the waste of "Entitlement Programs".
When cuts have to come, politicians automatically gravitate to the biggest spenders. Unfortunately, out of the 4 biggest spenders; defense, social security, education, and social services, 2 of the 3 means VOTES!!! And politicians won't try and cut, reduce, or even try and find WASTE THERE. They always go after defense. Yes, I'm pissed at the White House AND at congress. Both parties; ALL the politicians.
With the amount of money we are taxed, through income, fuel, import/export, Social Security, medicare/caid, etc... We would have MORE than enough for all the required spending, if we would simply STOP spending money on all the B.S. grants and programs. See, the problem is, MOST AMERICANS don't know what the government spends their money on. If you look at the BREAK DOWN, military, social programs, education, space program, Highways, agriculture, and all the other IMPORTANT THINGS; at the bottom of the tally, there's another block that says: "ALL OTHER: 22%". That means that more than 1/5th of all the money we take in, is used for stuff that really isn't that important. But it gets votes. It get's PACs. Instead of "ALL OTHER", it should show the breakdown of the first 75-80% with important, albeit debatable expenditures, then it should show 20-25% as POLITICAL BULL SH**.
Don't forget the $220+ Billion money spent annually just on the INTEREST from the debt incurred from borrowing money for some of these political boondoggles. The interest alone is estimated to be $1 Trillion dollars annually by 2020. God help us if/when the interest rates go up.
vareporter
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 126
I am a court reporter. Throughout my career I've done thousands of EEOC depositions and hearings, Workers' Comp depositions, Social Security hearings, etc. Let me just make it clear that I have seen first hand that the bilking of the American taxpayers is not exclusive to our politicians. Every time a federal employee files an EEOC complaint because they didn't get a promotion that they didn't deserve in the first place, every time someone takes a questionable tax deduction, stays on unemployment longer than necessary, tries to get SSI when they really could be working, etc., they are contributing to the issue. The American public needs to do some serious self-evaluation before we persecute those in office.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
Agree, but with one exception. All of those are "Taking" except a "tax deduction".... which is giving away less of your money. If there is a tax deduction that applies, by all means, take it. The people helping for figure that out are from the private sector anyway....
but yes, agree with the others....
Although Social Security is as clear today as when it began, a Ponzi scheme.
vareporter
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2010
- Messages
- 126
Myself and most of my colleagues are 1099 independent contractors. I have colleagues that find it acceptable (and I presume legal) to take a deduction for vacations, gas for their boat, on and on if the topic of work is discussed during said vacation, boat ride, etc. These are the type of deductions I speak of. As someone that has to pay self-employment tax (which means no one is helping me out with SS taxes) I most certainly advocate taking every legal and ETHICAL deduction.
Christcorp
15-Year Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2008
- Messages
- 5,381
What is the possibility of the family and friends of USAFA class of 2013 taking up a collection to get the Canadian Snowbirds to perform at the graduation ceremony.
Not to be disrespectful to Canada; but that's like asking the Navy Blue Angels to fly over an air force base; or Apple hosting a Microsoft convention. The purpose of the Thunderbirds is to show the "PRIDE" of the service that these graduates/Lieutenants are now joining. It's not just a show. If a show is all we want, then we can see if Aerosmith or Taylor Swift is available.
Since we can no longer afford the Thunderbirds or the Blue Angels, maybe we can get assistance from our neighbors to the north. Yes a flyover matters. Spoke with parents of USAFA 2013 class members and the disappointment is significant. It matters to the class and their families. It tradition and if our government can get it together maybe we can proceed without there help.
Christcorp
15-Year Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2008
- Messages
- 5,381
Again; I understand what you're saying, but a flyover on graduation day only matters if it's the thunderbirds. If cadets or parents don't think it matters that it's the thunderbirds, and ANY flying team can do a flyover for graduation, then IN MY OPINION, some cadets just spent 4 years at the academy and didn't learn the "Concept, Pride. and Esprit de Corps" that they were suppose to learn. In other words, they may have gotten their Academic training, but they didn't get their military training.
The DoD failed to begin planning until December of last year. You can't honestly say that anyone was confident Congress would suddenly have a breakthrough when they have been dysfunctional for the past several years. Not trying to pick on the DoD specifically, at least they didn't release several illegal immigrants, some with criminal charges, like ICE did in response to the sequestration.
I think there was an election in November that could have changed not only the President but also the composition of Congress. I'm not sure that it wasn't prudent for DOD to wait at least until then to begin taking sequestration seriously. Just my opinion....
MN-Dad-2016
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2012
- Messages
- 597
How much does the Thunderbird flyover cost (specifically for graduation)? Maybe the AOG could quickly raise money for this? Assuming the costs are "reasonable", I am confident past and future graduates would pay to make sure this tradition continues.
greentrees
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2009
- Messages
- 325
It's not like you can just pay to have the Thunderbirds perform. For them to perform they need to practice their flying skills; practice takes money. Right now the money for them to practice needs to go to mission essential flying hours, pilot upgrade hours and UPT. Some would say cut UPT and I'm sure UPT will experience some slowdown, but if you slow down the UPT pipeline you will mess with the whole pilot pipeline. AF has done that before and learned that isn't the best way to proceed.
What if T-birds were scheduled and they got weathered out? (and it's happened more than once) Big disappointment that day. Well, that day just got moved up to now. Let's get over it and remember there are a lot of other cuts happening besides airshows -- some that will make or break some people being able to pay their mortgage.
It seems to me the parents are more of the ones disappointed. 2013 cadets, while they'd like the flyover -- they're more concerned about walking across that stage and getting their diploma than the flyover.
What if T-birds were scheduled and they got weathered out? (and it's happened more than once) Big disappointment that day. Well, that day just got moved up to now. Let's get over it and remember there are a lot of other cuts happening besides airshows -- some that will make or break some people being able to pay their mortgage.
It seems to me the parents are more of the ones disappointed. 2013 cadets, while they'd like the flyover -- they're more concerned about walking across that stage and getting their diploma than the flyover.
MN excellent idea.
Greentree cadets are disappointed just read their Facebook page.
Other ideas:
1. Just flyover no show.
2. Finance flyover by parents.
3. Air national guard flyover.
4. Any airforce assets in the air at the graduation time flyover.
5. USAFA small planes or gliders flyover.
6. Unfortunately the Canadian Snowbirds are book for that day!
Greentree cadets are disappointed just read their Facebook page.
Other ideas:
1. Just flyover no show.
2. Finance flyover by parents.
3. Air national guard flyover.
4. Any airforce assets in the air at the graduation time flyover.
5. USAFA small planes or gliders flyover.
6. Unfortunately the Canadian Snowbirds are book for that day!
MN-Dad-2016
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2012
- Messages
- 597
Guilty as charged.
That said, I predict the cadets will be extremely disappointed as well.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 16,004
I agree with aglages that things could very well have changed. In fact, almost half the country thought they would. Further, unless you're privy to some inside information, I don't think you can say that DoD didn't start planning until December. What you can say is that those plans started to become public in December. I, personally, have no doubt there was much work going on in the background about this.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 16,004
There are lots of zoomies, cadets, and midshipmen who will suffer in some way over these cuts. Midshipmen will lose their summer training. Rumor says WP class sizes will be cut. Civilian DoD employees are taking 20% paycuts. I think the lack of a flyover at graduation is the least of it, and a very small impact indeed. It only affects "memories" as opposed to training or readiness. This isn't about your kid having a wonderful graduation. It's about the military readiness of our nation. Get over it.