Looks Like the Thunderbird's and Blue Angels are Scheduling Shows Again

If we're going to cut the Blues and the T-birds, why not cut out some other purely for show endeavors out of the government? Such as the NEA? Surely we don't need that? Surely we don't need things like culture and art when we can just make it ourselves?

The problem with cutting programs like this is that it isn't just about today, or the immediate impact on the budget, or whatever programs are being publicized by air show demonstration. They're a part of our country's heritage of military service and sacrifice. They're a visible reminder that America exists because Americans themselves have been and are still willing to stand up and stand between our lives and our entire way of life- and those who would see it all end by violent means.

More so, it's about the sense of unity and inspiration they can provide. The first time I saw Jules Bastien–Lepage's painting Joan of Arc I was deeply moved to the point of a paradigm shift in my universe. It gave rise to questions that would shape my life for years. So who's to say that the young boy or girl seeing these amazing flying machines and the people that operate them would not be similarly inspired?
Who's to say that they might still grow up to design the machine that puts us on another planet, or in another galaxy?

Such teams are as much a symbol of America as a national park, the Smithsonian, or possibly even the flag itself. They're great art, alive, thunderous, and inspiring. I think cutting them and discarding them like unwanted fat from a cut of meat is far too shortsighted an approach to fixing the woes of the budget.
 
Firebird2XC said:
If we're going to cut the Blues and the T-birds, why not cut out some other purely for show endeavors out of the government? Such as the NEA? Surely we don't need that? Surely we don't need things like culture and art when we can just make it ourselves?

The problem with cutting programs like this is that it isn't just about today, or the immediate impact on the budget, or whatever programs are being publicized by air show demonstration. They're a part of our country's heritage of military service and sacrifice. They're a visible reminder that America exists because Americans themselves have been and are still willing to stand up and stand between our lives and our entire way of life- and those who would see it all end by violent means.

More so, it's about the sense of unity and inspiration they can provide. The first time I saw Jules Bastien–Lepage's painting Joan of Arc I was deeply moved to the point of a paradigm shift in my universe. It gave rise to questions that would shape my life for years. So who's to say that the young boy or girl seeing these amazing flying machines and the people that operate them would not be similarly inspired?
Who's to say that they might still grow up to design the machine that puts us on another planet, or in another galaxy?

Such teams are as much a symbol of America as a national park, the Smithsonian, or possibly even the flag itself. They're great art, alive, thunderous, and inspiring. I think cutting them and discarding them like unwanted fat from a cut of meat is far too shortsighted an approach to fixing the woes of the budget.
Click to expand...

"Thats nice." - Seggy
 
Seggy said:
Until people/those who served in the military stop bitching about social welfare programs and others trying to get a handout for the government
Click to expand...

This is an oft repeated refrain of yours.

I really don't understand the relationship and why you regularly use it to blanket discount anything someone with military service says regarding government spending.

Being in the military means that you are providing work for compensation. Welfare and other entitlements are receiving compensation for doing nothing except existing. They could not be more different. I find it surprising that someone who has that much experience in a labor union, and is rightly concerned with ensuring that individuals receive fair compensation for their labor, willingly fails to delineate between the two.

By your logic, anyone getting any sort of government subsidy -- including insurance subsidized by the ACA, or any other "tax credit" -- must "stop bitching" about defense spending.
 
Maybe the bigger philosophical question is waste, period...
I have ofter wondered if by me picking up one piece of trash off the sidewalk as I walk, will that make a difference in my community? What about picking up three pieces?

Well, logic will probably tell you that in the BIG scheme of things, your piece of trash won't make much of a difference. For every piece you pick up, there are hundreds more thrown on the ground somewhere. So, why bother? Besides, it's somebody else's problem to clean up, not yours.

I think the same can hold true for budgeting. If I'm $1000 over my monthly budget, will saving four cents somewhere really make a difference? If I could cut out one $1000 item or even two $500 items, it would be easy wouldn't it? I think our country's problems are no different. We won't make fundamental changes in spending habits that will truly make a difference; rather, we cut 2 cents here (flight demonstration teams) three cents there (recreational facilities on base) ... smaller programs that will offer less political resistance but really don't make much of a financial difference in the big scheme of things. Are those smaller things wasteful? Maybe to some, but it's an easy political target and politicians insure the public sees the cuts, conveniently blaming the other side for the budget breakdowns and the sequestration debacle. We probably waste enough money in Afghanistan and Iraq to more than pay for many popular programs that face the axe here in the Stares. What we don't have is leadership in our government that is willing to take on the big issues that could truly make a difference. They are too worried about their re-election chances and staying friends with those who fund their political ambitions. And good ideas be damned, nobody crosses the aisle today because that may be political suicide. All those damn fools need an ass kicking and pink slips.
 
I don't know a serviceman or veteran that doesn't believe that we can make better budgeting decisions and cut military spending. On the other hand, I don't know one liberal that will concede that any major entitlement program should be cut.

Many liberals want to continue expanding social welfare programs and view programs they don't support as compromising their utopian goals just like they are critical of taxpayers and shareholders that want to keep their own money instead of funding a welfare state that is grinding our economy to a halt.

I vote and pay taxes. I certainly have every right to an opinion regarding how my money is spent. There is nothing hypocritical about wanting to cut social welfare spending, wanting to cut defense spending, AND wanting to preserve the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds.

Our country has evolved into an electorate in which half the folks don't pay taxes and are perfectly happy to vote themselves benefits that they aren't responsible for funding.
 
For the record -- and I say this as someone who was motivated to join the USAF directly from watching a Thunderbirds performance in 1983 -- I don't have a problem with cutting the T-Birds and Blues to save money.

That being said, there is lots of other low-hanging fruit in the DoD that should be trimmed before that happens. In the USAF, our obsession with zeroing out flying hours and unit budgets annually (lest we lose them next year!) is the single biggest case of institutional fraud/waste/abuse I've seen.

The bigger issue, as has been said before, is that the military's size and capabilities are a result of civilian-penned National Security Strategy. Ask it to do less, and then you will be able to reduce its size and capabilities. That is a decision that must be made in Congress and the White House...and not the Pentagon.
 
Hacker15e said:
This is an oft repeated refrain of yours.
Click to expand...

Yes, so?

I really don't understand the relationship and why you regularly use it to blanket discount anything someone with military service says regarding government spending.
Click to expand...

Because, the military needs to get their crap in order. When you have upper level leadership pulling crap as some Admirals have done over the last few months, or the games being played at the USAFA, I as a taxpayer have every right to say STOP, get your house in order with the leadership, and stop spending on demo teams when you can't properly pay the folks who are boots on the grounds fighting the war.

Then shall I touch on the military industrial complex this nature is gripped under?

Being in the military means that you are providing work for compensation. Welfare and other entitlements are receiving compensation for doing nothing except existing. They could not be more different. I find it surprising that someone who has that much experience in a labor union, and is rightly concerned with ensuring that individuals receive fair compensation for their labor, willingly fails to delineate between the two.
Click to expand...

If one is uninsured or underinsured it does affect society as a hole. Say a diabetic isn't insured, can't get insulin, and then has diabetic shock while driving to work at Walmart, during rush hour on a major freeway? This isn't about 'fair' compensation, it is about keeping society safe.

By your logic, anyone getting any sort of government subsidy -- including insurance subsidized by the ACA, or any other "tax credit" -- must "stop bitching" about defense spending.
Click to expand...

Not at all. I am just fed up with the behavior of the upper military leadership as well as the industrial military complex this nation is under, yet we can't get people healthier to create a better society.
 
Hacker15e said:
For the record -- and I say this as someone who was motivated to join the USAF directly from watching a Thunderbirds performance in 1983 -- I don't have a problem with cutting the T-Birds and Blues to save money.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your honesty with that. I think a far more valuable recruiting tool would be to bring up aspiring military folks in a military aircraft like a C-130, let them shoot a M-16 at the gun range, etc. Cheaper and more individualized towards the prospective soldier

That being said, there is lots of other low-hanging fruit in the DoD that should be trimmed before that happens. In the USAF, our obsession with zeroing out flying hours and unit budgets annually (lest we lose them next year!) is the single biggest case of institutional fraud/waste/abuse I've seen.
Click to expand...

Starts with the upper echelons of leadership.

The bigger issue, as has been said before, is that the military's size and capabilities are a result of civilian-penned National Security Strategy. Ask it to do less, and then you will be able to reduce its size and capabilities. That is a decision that must be made in Congress and the White House...and not the Pentagon.
Click to expand...

The decision won't be made as we have the military industrial complex heavily imbedded with the politics and decisions that are being made.
 
I felt the shutting down of the Demo teams was warranted for 2013. But Im ready for them to be back. You don't want to turn off your "OPEN" sign to save money. I know the airshow that I went to as a kid was a big deal around the city, and we also had to pay $ to enter. Corporate sponsors would also pay money to get their names out there and set up booths etc. Im not sure if the blues and thunderbirds get paid an appearance fee, but to keep them going maybe they should at non-military base events. There could be more clever ways of cutting back on costs, and spread out the reach of recruitment. There should never be military jet Solos at events where the headliners are going to be, for example.
 
Seggy said:
Not at all. I am just fed up with the behavior of the upper military leadership as well as the industrial military complex this nation is under, yet we can't get people healthier to create a better society.
Click to expand...

Is that really what you mean? If that is what you think, then why do you use it as a response to nullify statements from military or former military folks on JC, who are neither "upper military leadership" nor part of the "military-industrial complex"?

Sure seems like you are saying that, if someone is getting a paycheck working for Uncle Sam that it is somehow hypocritical for them to be against Uncle Sam giving some money to someone else.

Pretty much what you said here in a previous thread:
Seggy said:
That those who get the best healthcare/benefits in this country shouldn't bitch and moan about 'entitlements' for others.
Click to expand...

Seggy said:
Yes, I am talking about military members and other government workers. They do have every right to exercise their 1st Amendment right.

However, they shouldn't throw rocks while sitting in a glass house.
Click to expand...

If that isn't your perspective, then I have completely misunderstood. Next time an Admiral or General or Board member of Lockheed Martin starts posting on JC about the ACA or social security or defense spending, then fire away.
 
Seggy said:
I appreciate your honesty with that. I think a far more valuable recruiting tool would be to bring up aspiring military folks in a military aircraft like a C-130, let them shoot a M-16 at the gun range, etc. Cheaper and more individualized towards the prospective soldier
......
.
Click to expand...

Know how much I shot in my 5 years in the Navy....3 clips/magazines of 10 in bootcamp.....

Anyone can shoot a gun and you dont need to be in the service to do so. You can probably shoot more guns outside the military.... I know that's just an example....

Not every person shoots in the military but everyone can shoot outside the military.....

Even if the teams stopped the shows, those pilots would still be flying as well as those planes.......It not like if there budget was $1,000,000 you would save $1,000,000 by stopping the shows.
 
Hacker15e said:
Is that really what you mean? If that is what you think, then why do you use it as a response to nullify statements from military or former military folks on JC, who are neither "upper military leadership" nor part of the "military-industrial complex"?

Sure seems like you are saying that, if someone is getting a paycheck working for Uncle Sam that it is somehow hypocritical for them to be against Uncle Sam giving some money to someone else.

If that isn't your perspective, then I have completely misunderstood. Next time an Admiral or General or Board member of Lockheed Martin starts posting on JC about the ACA or social security or defense spending, then fire away.
Click to expand...

Those in the military, like yourself, shouldn't bite the hand that feeds them.
 
JEP said:
Know how much I shot in my 5 years in the Navy....3 clips/magazines of 10 in bootcamp.....

Anyone can shoot a gun and you dont need to be in the service to do so. You can probably shoot more guns outside the military.... I know that's just an example....

Not every person shoots in the military but everyone can shoot outside the military.....

Even if the teams stopped the shows, those pilots would still be flying as well as those planes.......It not like if there budget was $1,000,000 you would save $1,000,000 by stopping the shows.
Click to expand...

I would rather listen to @Derg 's workout mix on his iPod than go to a gun range.
 
T/O w/FSII said:
"Thats nice." - Seggy
Click to expand...

Yeah, he's got what he wants in life so he's dropped the facade of being even halfway reasonable. He sees his way and nothing else.

He once watched me prepare a meal and summarily dismissed it as 'unhealthy'. The next time I made something he approved, he grunted that "now that's healthy."

As if I cared. It was kind of funny to be given dietary criticism from a giant fat guy.

Seggy's entire world view is that his opinion is paramount and should be de facto rule, no matter how biased or unqualified he is to dispense that opinion. You'll never get him to concede the point. Save your breath.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top