Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

unhappycamper

(60,364 posts)
Mon Jan 27, 2014, 10:05 AM Jan 2014

The F-35: Mo’ Money, Fewer Jobs

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/pat-garofalo/2014/01/23/the-f-35-fighter-boondoggle-isnt-even-creating-jobs



Behold the most expensive weapons system in the world.

The F-35: Mo’ Money, Fewer Jobs
By Pat Garofalo
January 23, 2014

If there were a Congressional Boondoggle Hall of Fame, the F-35 fighter jet program would surely merit entry. Officially the most expensive weapons system in history, the cost of manufacturing the jets has increased a whopping 75 percent from its original estimate, and is now closing in on $400 billion. Over its lifetime, the F-35 program is expected to cost U.S. taxpayers $1.5 trillion, between construction and maintenance of the jets, if they ever all materialize.

Oh, and did I mention that the plane doesn't really work?

So how does such a project stay afloat? Because of jobs! Lockheed Martin, the defense company charged with delivering the jets, claims the program supports 125,000 jobs in 46 different states. That $400 billion for 125,000 jobs would be a lousy deal – at $3.2 million per job it would far cheaper to cut every one of those workers a $1 million check. But beyond that, there's good reason to believe that Lockheed's estimate is overblown.In a new report for the Center for International Policy, William Hartung claims the number of jobs created by the F-35 is more like 50,000 to 60,000, and that the number of states in which it supports job creation is also far lower than Lockheed would have us believe.

According to Hartung, Lockheed uses a much larger ratio of so-called "indirect jobs" – jobs created by companies that supply materials or other services for the F-35, or jobs created when those working on the F-35 spend their wages – than the academic literature warrants. Applying a more realistic ratio brings the job creation estimate down considerably. (Lockheed, of course, contests Hartung's numbers.)
1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The F-35: Mo’ Money, Fewer Jobs (Original Post) unhappycamper Jan 2014 OP
Actually... TRoN33 Jan 2014 #1
 

TRoN33

(769 posts)
1. Actually...
Mon Jan 27, 2014, 10:23 AM
Jan 2014

Experts from all over the world is calling F-35 the biggest 'White Elephant' project. It is embarrassing for the American aviation programs. This is why Air Force and Navy won't opt for joint sixth generation fighter programs.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»National Security & Defense»The F-35: Mo’ Money, Fewe...