1. Russ's Pocket
    Joined
    04 May '06
    Moves
    53845
    24 Aug '10 00:531 edit
    Food for thought. The cost of an F-22 is about 339 million.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor
  2. Russ's Pocket
    Joined
    04 May '06
    Moves
    53845
    24 Aug '10 00:59
    Or the B-2 price tag.


    "The cost to procure each B-2 was US$737 million in 1997 dollars, based only on a fleet cost of US$15.48 billion.[3] The procurement cost per aircraft as detailed in General Accounting Office (GAO) reports, which include spare parts and software support, was $929 million per aircraft in 1997 dollars.[3]

    The total program cost projected through 2004 was US$44.75 billion in 1997 dollars. This includes development, procurement, facilities, construction, and spare parts. The total program cost averaged US$2.13 billion per aircraft"


    I'm on the right, but I will say that DOD money moved to education would be money better spent.
  3. silicon valley
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    101289
    24 Aug '10 01:29
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    People like you, who are always claiming that the poor folks don't have the same quality of educational facilities that the better off neighborhoods have.
    This half billion dollar turkey will be a wasteland and covered in grafitti in 2 years.
    yeah, but even graffitti-covered it will be an architectural marvel, something for the lesser peoples of the world to look forward to in their evolution.
  4. silicon valley
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    101289
    24 Aug '10 01:30
    Originally posted by cheshirecatstevens
    Or the B-2 price tag.


    "The cost to procure each B-2 was US$737 million in 1997 dollars, based only on a fleet cost of US$15.48 billion.[3] The procurement cost per aircraft as detailed in General Accounting Office (GAO) reports, which include spare parts and software support, was $929 million per aircraft in 1997 dollars.[3]

    The total pro ...[text shortened]... m on the right, but I will say that DOD money moved to education would be money better spent.
    think of the little guys. look at all the people it kept off welfare.
  5. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    27626
    24 Aug '10 02:02
    Originally posted by cheshirecatstevens
    Or the B-2 price tag.


    "The cost to procure each B-2 was US$737 million in 1997 dollars, based only on a fleet cost of US$15.48 billion.[3] The procurement cost per aircraft as detailed in General Accounting Office (GAO) reports, which include spare parts and software support, was $929 million per aircraft in 1997 dollars.[3]

    The total pro ...[text shortened]... m on the right, but I will say that DOD money moved to education would be money better spent.
    It will be a great day when our schools get all the money they need and the Air Force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber.
  6. silicon valley
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    101289
    24 Aug '10 02:03
    Originally posted by rwingett
    It will be a great day when our schools get all the money they need and the Air Force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber.
    dude. that's awesome. you should submit it to Reader's Digest and collect the bounty.
  7. Account suspended
    Joined
    07 Feb '07
    Moves
    62961
    24 Aug '10 02:50
    Originally posted by zeeblebot
    dude. that's awesome. you should submit it to Reader's Digest and collect the bounty.
    That was a 30 year old line from somewhere, not original.
  8. silicon valley
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    101289
    24 Aug '10 03:04
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    That was a 30 year old line from somewhere, not original.
    😵
  9. tinyurl.com/ywohm
    Joined
    01 May '07
    Moves
    27860
    24 Aug '10 04:34
    Originally posted by sh76
    Correct. It's not costing the taxpayers. It's costing the fools who will buy California bonds at this point.

    Seriously. Who would buy California bonds right now? Maybe the Chinese?
    Wait. My understanding of bonds was that eventually they had to be repaid. If the taxpayer isn't repaying the bonds, who is? Or was I just daydreaming in class that day and missing how bonds really work?
  10. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    24 Aug '10 06:33
    Originally posted by zeeblebot
    think of the little guys. look at all the people it kept off welfare.
    There is our little friend the broken window fallacy again!
  11. Standard membersh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    New York
    Joined
    26 Dec '07
    Moves
    17585
    24 Aug '10 14:232 edits
    Originally posted by pawnhandler
    Wait. My understanding of bonds was that eventually they had to be repaid. If the taxpayer isn't repaying the bonds, who is? Or was I just daydreaming in class that day and missing how bonds really work?
    I was being facetious. Taxpayers will have to repay the bonds eventually, unless California goes bankrupt. It sounds crazy, but with that state's out of control spending and retarded tax increase requirements and the again-souring economy, one cannot rule it out as a possibility.*


    * Edit: I hope nobody construes this as a threat that I'm going to force California into bankruptcy. 😛

    😉
  12. silicon valley
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    101289
    24 Aug '10 17:03
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    There is our little friend the broken window fallacy again!
    that's not an umbrella he's holding (photo linked below).

    ATY had best watch his six. he's surrounded by defense plants that are fixing to get cut.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/79/Falling_down.jpg

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falling_Down
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree