Politics

[PHOENIX PHIL]

I don’t think Carter was stupid, I believe he did graduate from the Naval Academy but he had piss poor policies but I was young and may not remember correctly. My family was trying to build a house at the time and it’s the first time I had ever heard of something called “interest rates”

He did graduate from the Naval Academy. He was also a naval nuclear officer. He did his nuclear power qualifications at the Naval Reactors Facility in Idaho. The navy doesn't send stupid people into that path, much less make it easy for them.

Stupid? No, he wasn't stupid. Lousy president? Yah, I'll go with that.

 

[375 Ruger Fan]

Thanks to Jimmy Carter, interest rate on my first house mortgage was 17.5% back in 1981!!

I don’t think Carter was stupid, I believe he did graduate from the Naval Academy but he had piss poor policies but I was young and may not remember correctly. My family was trying to build a house at the time and it’s the first time I had ever heard of something called “interest rates”

I was in college in the early 80s and my dad retired from the Air Force as a colonel. It was tight for them to build their retirement house, a nothing fancy 2400 sq ft house on a few acres. Interest rates were in the 15-20% range. Today, people are crying about 7% mortgages because they have only known the 2-4% rates of the past decade or so. During the early 80s, the State of Louisiana came out with a low interest home mortgage program, which were in the 7% range, less than half the going rate. People camped out at the Fairgrounds for a couple weeks, essentially waiting in line to get some of the limited amount of financing to get a loan.

 

[Vashper]

Sounds like we could all use a diversion of thought--here's one for you. Around 1936 the right wingers in Spain felt they had been cheated out of an election. Already unhappy and feeling disenfranchised they reacted violently to an incident in which three of their political leaders were supposedly killed by police. Unbeknownst to them the police were not involved--leftists posing as police were intentionally inciting them. ...

Yes, General Franco was a well-known supporter of democracy and civil rights

 

[flying sailor]

Yes, General Franco was a well-known supporter of democracy and civil rights

yes he was. That was why he vetted personally all the fleeing nazis at the end of WW2.

 

[jeanes]

Carter was not stupid. I think he was well meaning but he couldn't stand up to Ted Kennedy and Tip O'neil. The Swamp was wide and deep even then.

 

[Red Leg]

Looking at it from a pure dollars point of view, disregarding how much of a percentage of GDP the spend may be. Do we really need to spend more than double that which China and Russia spends? If we "only" spent let's say $750 billion, would we really be hurting our defensive capabilities?

I don't really know the answer to that question nor will I even take a guess. But our newest provocateur, @glen matunas has a point in regards to our debt load. At some point that debt becomes a threat to national security too. Do we need to completely eliminate it? I don't think so, but it sure seems like reducing it from current levels would be wise.

Can that come from only reducing defense spending? I wouldn't think that wise either, but it would seem reasonable that it be part of the solution.

I don’t know your line of work, but I am fairly certain your mirror image in China makes considerably less. If building a combat vessel comparative cost of production “savings” are realized throughout the supply chain in the production of military end items. Moreover, we, unlike most of our adversaries, have a professional military - volunteers. It makes us far more lethal than our adversaries, allowing us to bring that capability to the field with far lower manning costs and fewer platforms. But, those professionals cost more than their corresponding opponent. Finally, our kit is substantially more advanced than our potential adversaries. That tech edge dose indeed cost a lot. But it is also essential if we are going to defend our national interests - protecting a world wide economic system based on free access to markets and materiel - at minimum manning requirements.

Finally, there are no “pure” dollars. Cost is a comparative function of GDP. Moreover, both China and Russia have extensive defense costs that are off budget that are on budget in the US. Retirement costs are a big one. The Economist recently concluded that China’s true defense costs are roughly equivalent to 720 billion USD and growing at 17% a year. Their strategic focus is also much narrower.

Finally, current US defense spending is a bargain compared to the Cold War. Then, we spent between 5 and 10% of GDP on defense depending on the decade. We now spend 3%. Most students of military history would argue a nation spending less than 5% is living at some risk.

 

[Red Leg]

Carter was not stupid. I think he was well meaning but he couldn't stand up to Ted Kennedy and Tip O'neil. The Swamp was wide and deep even then.

I don’t know, he pretty deftly out maneuvered Kennedy in the latter’s attempt to challenge Carter’s second term.

 

[CJW]

Is there no limit for how vile Trump can get..??

'Is she black or Indian?': Trump attacks Harris's racial identity

The Republican suggested Vice-President Kamala Harris changed her identity from Indian and "became black".

www.bbc.com

Where's the vile stuff Trump said? He's just calling out that they use race as a political tool.



This is the only vile thing I read. IMO you don't just get to make a claim like this without incontrovertible evidence. He's put up with 8 long years of it because he decided be their political opponent. Trump has said some ridiculous stuff, perhaps even called someone a racist undeservingly. But the tenacity with which they've gone after him with this claim is grotesque at best. Some might say it could lead to someone taking a shot or 5 at him. Maybe you missed this:

"Since when is Donald Trump, with his long and ugly history of racism, the arbiter of Blackness?" congressman Ritchie Torres of New York posted on X. He described Trump as a “relic of a racist past".

 

[jeanes]

I don’t know, he pretty deftly out maneuvered Kennedy in the latter’s attempt to challenge Carter’s second term.

I guess my point is that the runaway inflation didn't start with him and he couldn't count on support from the movers and shakers in his own party. He was not a great president. I went from Democrat to Independent ( leaning Republican) after his presidency.

 

[BJH65]

I don’t think Carter was stupid, I believe he did graduate from the Naval Academy but he had piss poor policies but I was young and may not remember correctly. My family was trying to build a house at the time and it’s the first time I had ever heard of something called “interest rates”

Agreed, I don’t think Carter was stupid. He was a naval submarine officer and subsequently trained to serve aboard nuclear submarines at the beginning of the nuclear submarine program during the early 1950’s and was greatly influenced by Admiral Hyman G. Rickover, considered the father of the nuclear navy, who recognized Carter to be a promising officer.

I did see perhaps the remnants of Carter’s policies at the Marine Helicopter Squadron I was first assigned to in the early 80’s, I noticed a couple large 3 wheeled tricycles with large wire baskets parked in the hanger, covered in dust and cobwebs. I asked what they were used for? I was told as a result of the 1970’s oil crisis, President Carter instructed the military to conserve gas, so these tricycles were used by mail couriers to deliver mail throughout the marine base!

 

[mdwest]

@mdwest,

Perhaps when you state a foreign workers salary that is hired, works, lives, and has no plans of relocating to the US. You state their salary in local currency, USD to local currency, and the average annual income of their comparable peers.

Im not sure Im tracking your question/statement here...

Regarding foreign workers (what I may not have made clear).. some of ours work in their home countries, have no intent to relocate to the US.. and are working in jobs specific to their home countries and/or some other foreign nation (ie the attorney from Sierra Leone that worked for us in Morocco)...

In other cases, we're very intentionally offshoring work that would otherwise be US based.. the internet makes this pretty easy... in a world full of teleworkers, it doesnt really matter if someone lives in Detroit or Dar Es Salaam... as long as there is good internet, good cell connectivity, and an airport within a reasonable distance, teleworkers (most office positions) can be executed from just about anywhere these days..

So what youre seeing is more and more companies offshoring positions that have historically been US based "office" positions.. whether its engineers, IT folks, accountants, HR, project managers, etc..

Generally speaking these people make substantially more working for US firms than they can make working locally.. and they have the added benefit of being "teleworkers" (theyre not having to report to some cubicle in an office in downtown manila, etc)... but they arent making the kind of money that would upset their local economy or have much impact outside of their own personal household... if companies were paying them those sorts of wages, there would be no point in hiring them at all... you'd just hire US citizens..

 

[wesheltonj]

youd be amazed at how inexpensive highly qualified foreign labor can be...

one of our employees is an attorney in guatemala.. she isnt just any run of the mill common attorney.. she has acted as an advisor to their supreme court, teaches at the law school in guatemala city, etc... she also has a background in accounting and finance, speaks absolutely perfect english, and is among the hardest working and most dedicated employees we've ever had...

I wont disclose her salary since she still works at my firm.. but.. what I will say is what we pay her in a year is SIGNIFICANTLY LESS than what we pay our US attorneys in a month (she is well less than 1/12th the cost of our US attorneys)...

While she clearly isnt able to practice in the US courts.. she is fully capable of doing contract reviews, conducting legal analysis, assisting in negotiations, etc.. and has saved us an absolute fortune over the years compared to what we would have had to pay to get those types of services stateside.. she has also been absolutely crucial to our work efforts across latin america..


another example where I will disclose salary... we had another attorney that worked for us several years ago.. she attended law school in France and had practiced law in Sierra Leone for a long time, ultimately rising to the position of the senior most judge in their juvenile court system.. she had also spent time working in The Hague in a support role to the International Court of Justice... we hired her under contract to act as an advisor to the government of Morocco on juvenile justice reforms on behalf of the US State Department.. We paid her $32K a year.. which seems like a pittance compared to what a US based attorney would have cost to do the same work.... but was a Kings Ransom for her.. she was super happy to have the job.. busted her ass every day.. did exceptional work (was personally commended by the King of Morocco on multiple occasions for her efforts)... and continued to work for us for the duration of the contract (5 years).. at that wage..

Sacrilege!

 

[sgt_zim]

Do you have an opinion on Friedman’s negative income tax proposal?

No. It's still subject to manipulation, and of course will be. In 1914, we had a "flat" income tax that only applied to less than 1% of the population. Congresses ever since have been "fixing" the tax code (70,000+ pages last I checked). Congress derives great power from dispensing favors to their friends and punishing those who aren't via "fixing" the tax law. Or outright promising OPM to the poor if they'll just vote for those congressional candidates promising this largesse.

"Get the money out of politics," people say. That's putting the cart before the horse. Reduce congress back to its Art I Sec 8 powers, and the money problem will largely solve itself. No system is perfect, and the best we can hope for is to minimize the harm that government causes by taking a lot of our money simply in an effort to feather their own nests and those of their cronies.

Anything short of stripping congress of income taxation power (which of course they won't willingly agree to) is just whistling past the graveyard. Addressing this in any other manner than stripping that power makes for entertaining theater, but that's about it.

 

[John Wasmuth]

Let me see if I have this straight, DEI is supposed to be the cat’s Meow, wonderful, save all program, but if you mention some one was a DEI hire, you’re a racist…….. the leftist communists come closer to defining the word insanity every day.

 

[wesheltonj]

I guess my point is that the runaway inflation didn't start with him . . .

One could say Nixon, with his infamous line, "am a Keynesian now."

 

[sgt_zim]

Let me see if I have this straight, DEI is supposed to be the cat’s Meow, wonderful, save all program, but if you mention some one was a DEI hire, you’re a racist…….. the leftist communists come closer to defining the word insanity every day.

Pointing out that the emperor is in fact wearing no clothes is well outside the Overton Window.

 

[Hunt anything]

Looks like the US and Russia have worked out a prisoner swap. Have not seen who we will send back but we are getting at least 3 of our people back.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

I don’t know your line of work, but I am fairly certain your mirror image in China makes considerably less. If building a combat vessel comparative cost of production “savings” are realized throughout the supply chain in the production of military end items. Moreover, we, unlike most of our adversaries, have a professional military - volunteers. It makes us far more lethal than our adversaries, allowing us to bring that capability to the field with far lower manning costs and fewer platforms. But, those professionals cost more than their corresponding opponent. Finally, our kit is substantially more advanced than our potential adversaries. That tech edge dose indeed cost a lot. But it is also essential if we are going to defend our national interests - protecting a world wide economic system based on free access to markets and materiel - at minimum manning requirements.

Finally, there are no “pure” dollars. Cost is a comparative function of GDP. Moreover, both China and Russia have extensive defense costs that are off budget that are on budget in the US. Retirement costs are a big one. The Economist recently concluded that China’s true defense costs are roughly equivalent to 720 billion USD and growing at 17% a year. Their strategic focus is also much narrower.

Finally, current US defense spending is a bargain compared to the Cold War. Then, we spent between 5 and 10% of GDP on defense depending on the decade. We now spend 3%. Most students of military history would argue a nation spending less than 5% is living at some risk.

All valid points that I have no argument against. My career started in the defense industry. Naval sonar systems, USAF F-16 program and then naval nuclear propulsion. Loved it and miss it, particularly aircraft. Trust me, I have strong convictions of investment in defense especially as I approach the end of my career and I focus some of my experience on passing it to the younger engineers.

It's only that I also have some focus on our national debt. I'm no expert in finance, but more money going out than coming in.....well you don't need to be a financial wizard to know there's a limitation for how long that can go on before the poop hits the fan.

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Agreed, I don’t think Carter was stupid. He was a naval submarine officer and subsequently trained to serve aboard nuclear submarines at the beginning of the nuclear submarine program during the early 1950’s and was greatly influenced by Admiral Hyman G. Rickover, considered the father of the nuclear navy, who recognized Carter to be a promising officer.

I did see perhaps the remnants of Carter’s policies at the Marine Helicopter Squadron I was first assigned to in the early 80’s, I noticed a couple large 3 wheeled tricycles with large wire baskets parked in the hanger, covered in dust and cobwebs. I asked what they were used for? I was told as a result of the 1970’s oil crisis, President Carter instructed the military to conserve gas, so these tricycles were used by mail couriers to deliver mail throughout the marine base!

When Rickover was in charge (and perhaps continued with his predecessors I'm guessing), naval officers pursuing the nuke propulsion path were required to interview with him. Fail the interview and that was the end of the journey. Some of those stories of those interviews were legendary.

 

[Altitude sickness]

Most US nuclear power plants are run using many of Rickovers principles and US Navy safety rules