General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Pentagon will spend nearly $400 billion for thousands more warplanes over the next 20 years
http://www.businessinsider.com/r-pratt-says-growth-in-f-35-production-will-help-cut-costs-2015-2An F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing aircraft flies behind a tanker on a mission over Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., in September 2013.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon's plans to fund 50 percent more F-35 fighter jets in fiscal 2016 will help drive down the price of the new plane and its engine, a top official with enginemaker Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies Corp, said Thursday.
Bennett Croswell, president of Pratt's military engines division, said the company had submitted a proposal for the ninth and tenth batches of engines to the F-35 program office, and he hoped to sign those agreements by the end of 2015.
The previous two production agreements lowered the cost of the engine by nearly 8 percent, Croswell said, noting that further reductions were planned for the contracts now under discussion - 60 engines in the ninth batch and 100 in the tenth.
The U.S. government signs separate production agreements with Lockheed Martin Corp, which builds the plane, and Pratt, which builds its F135 engine. The Pentagon plans to spend nearly $400 billion to develop and build 2,457 of the radar-evading warplanes over the next two decades.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/r-pratt-says-growth-in-f-35-production-will-help-cut-costs-2015-2#ixzz3Qy1SmBxm
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)But hey, it's taxpayer money, not REAL money.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)If you produce more products the price per unit decreases.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... just what will these warplanes be defending?
Victor_c3
(3,557 posts)If we don't have lots of fancy (and expensive) military equipment and huge piles of disabled veterans what would we have parades for? Why would we have a Veterans Day or a Memorial Day? What would Americans do without their mattress sales and BBQs on those days? That is what freedom is all about!!
Geeze! Some people just hate freedom!
(I hope my sarcasm is glaringly clear)
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)we'll build all these planes so we can hand over excesses to third world countries so they can fight terrorists, who will eventually capture said planes/equipment to fight back in return? Do I have that right?
Octafish
(55,745 posts)A bike? A camera? A Double-0 briefcase?
Well, the F-35 is like that, except bigger, for the MIC.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Scholar. Sage. Pro-business.
The Pitfalls of Peace
The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth
Tyler Coswen
The New York Times, JUNE 13, 2014
The continuing slowness of economic growth in high-income economies has prompted soul-searching among economists. They have looked to weak demand, rising inequality, Chinese competition, over-regulation, inadequate infrastructure and an exhaustion of new technological ideas as possible culprits.
An additional explanation of slow growth is now receiving attention, however. It is the persistence and expectation of peace.
The world just hasnt had that much warfare lately, at least not by historical standards. Some of the recent headlines about Iraq or South Sudan make our world sound like a very bloody place, but todays casualties pale in light of the tens of millions of people killed in the two world wars in the first half of the 20th century. Even the Vietnam War had many more deaths than any recent war involving an affluent country.
Counterintuitive though it may sound, the greater peacefulness of the world may make the attainment of higher rates of economic growth less urgent and thus less likely. This view does not claim that fighting wars improves economies, as of course the actual conflict brings death and destruction. The claim is also distinct from the Keynesian argument that preparing for war lifts government spending and puts people to work. Rather, the very possibility of war focuses the attention of governments on getting some basic decisions right whether investing in science or simply liberalizing the economy. Such focus ends up improving a nations longer-run prospects.
It may seem repugnant to find a positive side to war in this regard, but a look at American history suggests we cannot dismiss the idea so easily. Fundamental innovations such as nuclear power, the computer and the modern aircraft were all pushed along by an American government eager to defeat the Axis powers or, later, to win the Cold War. The Internet was initially designed to help this country withstand a nuclear exchange, and Silicon Valley had its origins with military contracting, not todays entrepreneurial social media start-ups. The Soviet launch of the Sputnik satellite spurred American interest in science and technology, to the benefit of later economic growth.
War brings an urgency that governments otherwise fail to summon. For instance, the Manhattan Project took six years to produce a working atomic bomb, starting from virtually nothing, and at its peak consumed 0.4 percent of American economic output. It is hard to imagine a comparably speedy and decisive achievement these days.
SNIP...
Living in a largely peaceful world with 2 percent G.D.P. growth has some big advantages that you dont get with 4 percent growth and many more war deaths. Economic stasis may not feel very impressive, but its something our ancestors never quite managed to pull off. The real questions are whether we can do any better, and whether the recent prevalence of peace is a mere temporary bubble just waiting to be burst.
Tyler Cowen is a professor of economics at George Mason University.
SOURCE: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/14/upshot/the-lack-of-major-wars-may-be-hurting-economic-growth.html?_r=0
The guy seems to specialize in Big Ticket themes:
Just when I thought, maybe, we had reached bottom and were ready to bounce up -- I discovered there may be no bottom -- for me and the large part of the 99-percent.
Economist Tyler Cowen of George Mason University has seen the future and it looks bleak for most of us. Thankfully, those at the top, though, are in for some more good times. He spoke about his findings with NPR's Steve Inskeep. I almost dropped my smartphone into my coffee while texting during rush hour, listening to the report this morning, I was so steamed.
Tired Of Inequality? One Economist Says It'll Only Get Worse
by NPR STAFF
September 12, 2013 3:05 AM
Economist Tyler Cowen has some advice for what to do about America's income inequality: Get used to it. In his latest book, Average Is Over, Cowen lays out his prediction for where the U.S. economy is heading, like it or not:
"I think we'll see a thinning out of the middle class," he tells NPR's Steve Inskeep. "We'll see a lot of individuals rising up to much greater wealth. And we'll also see more individuals clustering in a kind of lower-middle class existence."
It's a radical change from the America of 40 or 50 years ago. Cowen believes the wealthy will become more numerous, and even more powerful. The elderly will hold on to their benefits ... the young, not so much. Millions of people who might have expected a middle class existence may have to aspire to something else.
SNIP...
Some people, he predicts, may just have to find a new definition of happiness that costs less money. Cowen says this widening is the result of a shifting economy. Computers will play a larger role and people who can work with computers can make a lot. He also predicts that everyone will be ruthlessly graded every slice of their lives, monitored, tracked and recorded.
CONTINUED with link to the audio...
http://www.npr.org/2013/09/12/221425582/tired-of-inequality-one-economist-says-itll-only-get-worse
For some reason, the interview with Steve Inskeep didn't bring up the subject of the GOVERNMENT DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT LIKE IN THE NEW DEAL so I thought I'd bring it up. Older DUers may recall the Democratic Party once actually did do stuff for the average American, from school and work to housing and justice. But, we can't afford that now, obviously.
Oh, the good news is the 1-percent may swell to a 15-percent "upper middle class" while the rest of the middle class goes the other way. Gee. That sounds eerily familiar. Oh..."Commercial interests are very powerful interests" uttered same press conference where Smirko said, "Money trumps peace." Pretty much always the on-message 24/7/366 for most of the last century.
Tyler Cowen, man of the Final Hours.
Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,501 posts)all these planes?