BOEING WINS MILITARY CONTRACT!!!!!...WOOHOO!!...not

[JK/SEA]

Discuss...

http://www.komonews.com/news/boeing/116914448.html

[ihsv]

"Really excited to hear I can retire here now," said one worker on the 767 line. "I have a future for my family and my kids."

That about says it all

[Kludge]

What's bad? Alternative was the contract going to a EU company.

[JK/SEA]

Yeah, maybe now those soon to be laid off taxpayer funded paid UNION teachers in Wisconsin, can now move to Washington State and build taxpayer funded union built planes....

effin hilarious how some of you go off on this Wisconsin issue without thinking. Amazing.

[Echoes]

This the the type of corporate welfare RP harps on all the time, while both parties dont say a peep.

[JK/SEA]

This the the type of corporate welfare RP harps on all the time, while both parties dont say a peep.

Yep...

its easier for 'so-called' Libertarians to harp on public servants, such as Teachers and their pay and bennies, but when it comes to the Military Industrial Complex and the OBSCENE amount of money funneled into it, it seems to get a blind eye. Very odd.

Sound of crickets in this thread...so far...where are all the anti-public union shrill mongers?

[silverhandorder]

STFU we don't want either. Only one guy in this thread actually liked it.

[Brett85]

My liberal cousin is thrilled about this. It can't be a good thing.

[Danke]

Yeah, maybe now those soon to be laid off taxpayer funded paid UNION teachers in Wisconsin, can now move to Washington State and build taxpayer funded union built planes....

effin hilarious how some of you go off on this Wisconsin issue without thinking. Amazing.

What does public teacher unions in WI have to do with private unions in WA working for a contract awarded to provide for the national defense?

Certainly one can argue we spend too much on defense, but how does that relate to States spending on their government schools and the Federal government spending on national defense?

I'm not sure where in the Constitution it says we need to provide for a national education system.

[Pericles]

"Say what you want about the defense budget, but it is a hell of a jobs program." Casper Weinberger

[libertarian4321]

You can argue about whether or not the military needs these tankers- I certainly think our military can be downsized.

However, given that this is unlikely to happen anytime soon, I don't see why some of you are upset about Boeing winning and building the jets in the USA, as opposed to their European competitors.

[JK/SEA]

STFU we don't want either. Only one guy in this thread actually liked it.

go back to sleep.

[JK/SEA]

What does public teacher unions in WI have to do with private unions in WA working for a contract awarded to provide for the national defense?

Certainly one can argue we spend too much on defense, but how does that relate to States spending on their government schools and the Federal government spending on national defense?

I'm not sure where in the Constitution it says we need to provide for a national education system.

taxes for the war machine...ok
taxes for education..not ok

ok...got it.

and don't tell me this is just 'defense' spending...this country has enough 'defense' already.

Jobs program is more like it.

[HOLLYWOOD]

The US government needs to balance the budget. 43% of the budget is borrowed. Start with 43% of US Military Cuts.

We don't need a Gazillion Fighter squadrons, Bomber Wingers, 1000+ military bases/installations, a Dozen Aircraft carriers, or 100 Flying Gas Stations, etc etc etc.

They should pay to change the name to The Depart Of Offense or back to the Department of War.

[Mini-Me]

Yep...

its easier for 'so-called' Libertarians to harp on public servants, such as Teachers and their pay and bennies, but when it comes to the Military Industrial Complex and the OBSCENE amount of money funneled into it, it seems to get a blind eye. Very odd.

Sound of crickets in this thread...so far...where are all the anti-public union shrill mongers?

Right here, actually! ;) The military-industrial complex - of which Boeing comprises part - is a far bigger parasite on America's back than Wisconsin's unions, or probably anyone else. The reason you don't see the "shrill mongers" here is simple: In the case of the public unions, someone's actually taking them on (although in a strange, bullshit way), and people here found something to be [relatively] happy about for once. (It was also the "it" issue that everyone was talking about, and attention only garners more attention.) In contrast, THIS is just obscene MIC business-as-usual, so it's nothing to get excited about. This kind of spending needs to STOP, but this thread isn't about that; it's about the steady march of war profiteers towards their tenth vacation home. If there were a bill going through Congress today to eliminate the vast majority of "defense" spending - which actually stood a chance of passing - I think you'd see a lot more excitement than you saw in the Wisconsin threads though.

An important point is that telling public unions to go screw themselves is a good way for Wisconsin to address its own budget problems, but it's grossly insufficient for stopping the MIC. Aside from ten thousand dollar toilet seats (or whatever the actual figure is), the MIC is so much larger and more insidious, and it can only be stopped by comprehensive foreign/"defense"/fiscal/monetary policy overhauls, if not full-blown secession or government collapse. Stopping the MIC isn't some nice little milestone or exciting distraction like dumping public unions is; stopping the MIC is a core long-term goal of this whole movement, if not THE core of the movement itself, for all intents and purposes. However, it's a long, hard, slog, not a sprint, which is why it's hard to get riled up about it all the time, like we can about the issue du jour.

Bottom line: You can get pumped up about someone giving the unions a middle finger, but for something like this, you have to squeeze your eyes shut, grit your teeth, and push forward, lest you puke all over yourself in disgust. If you perceive a disparity of concern, I think it's unfair to accuse others of hypocrisy or not caring or being "so-called" libertarians, until you really consider all of these things. Sometimes the people you're with deserve the benefit of the doubt.

[akforme]

taxes for the war machine...ok
taxes for education..not ok

ok...got it.

and don't tell me this is just 'defense' spending...this country has enough 'defense' already.

Jobs program is more like it.

For the most part I agree with you and I'm against both, however, defense is a primary role of the federal government, education is the role of the individual. This is corporatism, but our education is forced indoctrination.

[TruckinMike]

taxes for the war machine...ok
taxes for education..not ok

ok...got it.

and don't tell me this is just 'defense' spending...this country has enough 'defense' already.

NOBODY is advocating for the military industrial complex! You're reading a bit much into these comments.

TMike

[Ekrub]

Do we have the same facebook friend?


Boeing wins $35b Air Force tanker contract. Woohoo!

my response:


Yay for the military-industrial complex.

This kid is a big progressive type.

[heavenlyboy34]

For the most part I agree with you and I'm against both, however, defense is a primary role of the federal government, education is the role of the individual. This is corporatism, but our education is forced indoctrination.

Technically, defense is a state role, using state and local militias. The only time defense is a federal concern is during a declared war or invasion. This "national defense" nonsense is part of what brought about the military-industrial complex.

[HOLLYWOOD]

The total cost of the Flying Gas Stations will be well over $50 BILLION by end of the FIRST contract... then there's the BS congressional districts that order more when even the military doesn't want anymore.

Last week... Congressman Norman DICKS was bickering with members of his own party on the fiscal budget when they wanted to cut defense... then just looking at the Congressional District... well well... Home Plate Boeing.

U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks, Ranking Democratic Member of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, issued the following comment concerning the award of a contract to build 179 air refueling tankers for the U.S. Air Force:


“I am extremely happy today for the workers at Boeing who will build the next generation of air refueling tankers for the United States Air Force. The selection of the Boeing 767 as the platform for our new tankers will give U.S. pilots the finest, most capable aircraft in order to sustain our country’s unique ability to project power and defend our national security interests around the world. Deputy Secretary of Defense Bill Lynn told me this afternoon that the Boeing bid was the clear winner in this competition, and that the Defense Department was now prepared to move rapidly to begin the replacement of our Eisenhower-era fleet of Boeing-built KC-135 tankers. This contract award will add new life to the 767 production line in Everett, Wash, and it will be directly responsible for 11,000 Boeing jobs. After working on this program for nearly 10 years, I am delighted that we are now moving forward with the urgently-needed upgrade of our tanker fleet.” I think we should change EVERY SINGLE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT IN THE COUNTRY from NUMBERS to what they Truly Reflect:

i.e.

Washington State 6th District is changed to: Military Industrial Complex BOEING District #6
Alabama's 2nd Congressional District changed to: Military Industrial Complex JKM Raytheon #2
Washington State 1st Congressional District to:Microsoft Corporate District #1

Congressman representing Military Industrial Complex (BOEING #6) is:http://www.house.gov/dicks/Navimages/spacer.gif NORMAN DICKShttp://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/027N8YvcPw1kf/610x.jpg

[goldencane]

This is even worse than it seems on the surface. Start with the cost of the new tanker fleet, add the cost of the aircraft they will build so that they have something for these tankers to fill up, and add the massive operating cost, it is just ridiculous. $35 billion for the contract alone, thats over $100K per person in the country!

[JK/SEA]

I guess my point is if the people railing against Public Unions and teachers in general, would put just 1/10 the energy they expelled during this Wisconsin issue, and that includes some in RPF, towards railing against the MIC, the illegal wars, and politicians who deserve nothing less than prison, then 'WE' might actually get things under control.

I apologize if i appear to be an 'American citizen first' kinda guy. As an example, and i defer to Ron Paul concerning social security. You CANNOT just go cold turkey with these issues. Like whats being done in Wisconsin. These unions offered concessions...except of course the cops...but were rejected, and i believe THIS is very immoral. You cannot just cut people off and/or fire them...this is pure evil IMHO...

[Mini-Me]

I guess my point is if the people railing against Public Unions and teachers in general, would put just 1/10 the energy they expelled during this Wisconsin issue, and that includes some in RPF, towards railing against the MIC, the illegal wars, and politicians who deserve nothing less than prison, then 'WE' might actually get things under control.

I apologize if i appear to be an 'American citizen first' kinda guy. As an example, and i defer to Ron Paul concerning social security. You CANNOT just go cold turkey with these issues. Like whats being done in Wisconsin. These unions offered concessions...except of course the cops...but were rejected, and i believe THIS is very immoral. You cannot just cut people off and/or fire them...this is pure evil IMHO...

On Social Security practicalities, I tend to agree with Ron Paul too (though it's such a mess that there IS no gentle solution), but I wouldn't apply the same concept to the public unions. I certainly wouldn't call firing the union protestors "evil." That's a risk you take when you go on strike. People are laid off or fired all the time in the private sector, and moreso actually because governments sap money away from the private sector and spend it wastefully. (The money has to come from somewhere, after all...and ultimately, it comes at the cost of private sector jobs, among other things.) Every high-paying government job we eliminate makes room for two (plus) jobs in the private sector, on average (more, really, because the higher productivity of non-government jobs creates more wealth to go around). Every high-paying government job we halve salaries/benefits for creates at least one comparable job in the private sector, on average. The transition isn't immediate or anything, but such a transition and reorganization would occur if allowed to. In other words, I'd consider a house-cleaning in Wisconsin to be a net creator of jobs, not a net destroyer of jobs...and perhaps those extra jobs would go to people who are much harder-up for one than unionized teachers.

That's why, when I see union teachers protesting government salary cuts, I don't see hapless employees. I see people who are screwing over their very own overtaxed neighbors, who are not only unemployed or underemployed, but unemployed or underemployed in part BECAUSE of the tax burden. I see what they're doing as a lot more "evil" than firing them would be. In a way, that kind of thing hits closer to home than the MIC does, because the MIC is a huge, faceless machine, whereas these people are supposed to be our neighbors. Obviously, the MIC is a much bigger enemy (both in terms of wasteful spending and violence/destruction) - the MIC is really truly EVIL, whereas the union protestors are really just self-centered, oblivious assholes - but I don't think that's a reason to give a lesser evil a pass when a very real opportunity comes up to confront it. As I said before, the union fight is the issue du jour, and there's an actual chance of something changing...which makes it a bit more exciting than seeing depressing, nauseating news about Boeing gorging itself on money and blood.

Of course, the Wisconsin government is blatantly hypocritical in giving a pass to police unions, etc., and don't think for a second that's gone ignored...but here's the way I see it: As I stated in another post, "The government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul." The MIC is a Paul, and police unions are Pauls...but so are all government dependents who lobby or agitate for government spending in their own interest. Unionized government employees are government dependents, which makes them inherently opposed to government rollbacks...but only so long as they're government dependents themselves. ;) Do you see where I'm going? Every one that gets fired (or undercompensated, as opposed to traditional government overcompensation) is another one that ends up on our side of the fence, i.e. the general tax-paying public being sucked dry for the benefit of the remaining dependents. Chipping away at government positions brings more people to the side that's being screwed over by government spending...and once we have enough, we might actually be able to unite, take on our more powerful enemies, and WIN. The MIC is powerful, and they're recipients of a HUGE amount of largesse, but they aren't a huge voting bloc or grassroots army in and of themselves. The police unions are powerful, but they aren't a huge voting bloc or grassroots army in and of themselves. Regular government employees, unionized governments employees and teachers, etc...now, THAT is a big voting bloc and grassroots army. I'd kind of rather shake things up a bit, so maybe they'll wake up and stand with us against all the taxing and spending, instead of against us...but as long as they're Paul and we're Peter, that's not going to happen.

[AGRP]

Keep them war$ commin! More war$! More war$!!!!

Nothing taste$ better than murder and the loss of our liberty!

[JK/SEA]

I agree with most of what you said. But i know you know we are dealing with real human lives here. Established families who buy things like cars and homes etc. Granted, some of these people came off as desperate in that rotunda, and perhaps they are justified in being terrified about the prospect of losing that job that they went to college to obtain, and BECAUSE of their union, they must be punished. Sending them packing in large numbers is not going to go well. But it appears a majority wants that pound of flesh, and be damned with them offering concessions.

Good luck Wisconsin...

looks like i hi-jacked my own thread...

[Mini-Me]

I agree with most of what you said. But i know you know we are dealing with real human lives here. Established families who buy things like cars and homes etc. Granted, some of these people came off as desperate in that rotunda, and perhaps they are justified in being terrified about the prospect of losing that job that they went to college to obtain, and BECAUSE of their union, they must be punished. Sending them packing in large numbers is not going to go well. But it appears a majority wants that pound of flesh, and be damned with them offering concessions.

Good luck Wisconsin...

Even if all the unionized employees were fired and the Wisconsin government completely abandoned unions (which isn't realistically going to happen, though it'd be nice if it did), I wouldn't necessarily see that as a "pound of flesh." Individual teachers could still reapply for their job - after all, someone is going to have to fill it, since they aren't getting rid of the schools - and anyone who wasn't particularly obnoxious would probably stand a good chance of getting it (for continuity reasons, etc.)...just not at the overly inflated compensation levels they had before. Heck, I'd be surprised if the compensation levels weren't still higher than those of private sector teachers. Could this affect people's ability to make house payments, car payments, etc.? Sure it could...just like getting laid off or demoted in the private sector could. However, I don't think it's really unreasonable to say it's time for government employees to face the same realities that their non-governmental counterparts do. Given time, it might help to ease the conditions for everyone. (...not as much as sending war profiteers to a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison would, but that's more of a life goal than a short-term project.)

Even FDR acknowledged a serious problem with public unions, in that there is nobody sitting at the negotiating table representing the interests of taxpayers. I think it's pretty clear that people (at least here) are sick and tired of that imbalance and would be glad to see it done away with...but I'd consider that much more of a necessary correction than a "punishment." Of course, the unions themselves, and their self-serving organizers and affiliates in the mafia would be left out in the cold, and I'm sure there's a degree of vengeful retribution there, but...is that really a bad thing? ;)


looks like i hi-jacked my own thread...
Sorry that I helped. :o I seem to be in a regular habit of aiding and abetting thread hijacks.

[Anti Federalist]

What's bad? Alternative was the contract going to a EU company.

Agreed.

What's "bad" is that there should not have been a $35 billion dollar contract out there for new flying gas tanks in the first place, when we're fucking broke.

When you're broke you can't afford new $35 billion dollar flying gas tanks purchased on a credit card.

[Danke]

$35 billion for the contract alone, thats over $100K per person in the country!

Is this from that "fuzzy math" I have been hearing so much about? Did you get your schooling in Wisconsin?

[Mini-Me]

Is this from that "fuzzy math" I have been hearing so much about? Did you get your schooling in Wisconsin?


Michael: I must've put a decimal point in the wrong place or something. Shit, I always do that; I always mess up some mundane detail!
Peter: Oh! Well, this is not a mundane detail, Michael!
Michael: Hey, quit getting pissed at me, alright? This was all your idea, asshole!
Peter: Alright, okay, alright, let's try not to get pissed off at each other. Alright? Let's just calm down, let's try to figure this thing out together.
;)

It IS over $100 per person in the country though...straight into the pockets of the MIC.

[Ricky201]

Agreed.

What's "bad" is that there should not have been a $35 billion dollar contract out there for new flying gas tanks in the first place, when we're fucking broke.

When you're broke you can't afford new $35 billion dollar flying gas tanks purchased on a credit card.

Hell our government can't afford a pack of gum without going insolvent...

This is always huge news here in western Washington and it's very sad to see very few people here not celebrating about it...