Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVII: The Snark Enlightenment

[Nova Cyberia]

Thank you. I appreciate your respect for my low opinion of you.

That is sig worthy.

I aim to please.

[Grand Britannia]

China is set to lose about half its population due to aging before 2050.

Our problems are mild by comparison.

[Novus America]

The Russian defense industry is a mess.
Transferring it to state owned monopolies has not improved its performance.
And leaves them with no alternatives.
The main reason the have lower costs is they pay their workers very little.

Our wages are much higher.
Sure the defense industry should not be ENTIRELY in private hands. Nor entirely in government hands either.
Compare NASA to Space X for example.

If we relied just on NASA we would be screwed.

Some of it might be because of lower wages and it might also be because its relatively easy for the government to charge itself cheap prices.

And of course it's going to be a mess. Russia's a corrupt oligarchy. We can do it better than them.

NASA’s failures do not leave me optimistic. The private space industry is the only thing keeping us up in space for example. Public private partnerships with the right balance are the best option, for research and manufacturing at least (actual operations should stay in military hands, PMC mercenary types have a bad record).

[New haven america]

If that's the excuse that you want to use, then that's cool, as I have neither the power nor care to actually stop you from thinking so.

Thank you. I appreciate your respect for my low opinion of you.

If that's what you want to believe, then that's cool.

[Nova Cyberia]

Some of it might be because of lower wages and it might also be because its relatively easy for the government to charge itself cheap prices.

And of course it's going to be a mess. Russia's a corrupt oligarchy. We can do it better than them.

NASA’s failures do not leave me optimistic. The private space industry is the only thing keeping us up in space for example. Public private partnerships with the right balance are the best option, for research and manufacturing at least (actual operations should stay in military hands, PMC mercenary types have a bad record).

NASA's failures are largely due to its budget being raped over the years. SpaceX should have failed as a company years ago but it only still exists because of government subsidies.

[Nova Cyberia]

Thank you. I appreciate your respect for my low opinion of you.

If that's what you want to believe, then that's cool.

If that's what you want to believe about me believing it, then that's cool.

[Novus America]

I love how you said I was wrong about the US having a war based economy and are now arguing about the economic and strategic benefits of military contract work, with a lot of you supporting contract work. Gee, it's almost as if I had a point or something.

Now I'll just sit back and enjoy the delicious irony.

Way to totally miss the point again.
The point is that different types of wars benefit different types of contractors.

COIN HURTS many manufacturers of CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS, obviously!

What is so hard to understand there? If we divert money from building destroyers to training police in Afghanistan, (and the money is stolen by corrupt Afganis) please explain how this is good for ship builders and steel mills?

You seem convinced the defense industry is a cartoonishly evil hive mind. And clearly do not understand how it is structured or how it works.

[Novus America]

NASA’s failures do not leave me optimistic. The private space industry is the only thing keeping us up in space for example. Public private partnerships with the right balance are the best option, for research and manufacturing at least (actual operations should stay in military hands, PMC mercenary types have a bad record).

NASA's failures are largely due to its budget being raped over the years. SpaceX should have failed as a company years ago but it only still exists because of government subsidies.

NASA’s failures are just as much its risk adverse organizational culture, and poor management.
Its problems go much deeper than money. Throwing money at the SLS would not help, because the SLS is inferior.

Sure Space X gains money from government contracts, but it also builds better rockets CHEAPER than NASA.

Which is why you never want to only have one source to get your products from.

So we need a good balance and public private partnership.

I agree we need reform, the defense industry is not well controlled always, and we outsource too much to it, but nationalization of all of it would cause more problems then it solves.

[Nova Cyberia]

I love how you said I was wrong about the US having a war based economy and are now arguing about the economic and strategic benefits of military contract work, with a lot of you supporting contract work. Gee, it's almost as if I had a point or something.

Now I'll just sit back and enjoy the delicious irony.

Way to totally miss the point again.
The point is that different types of wars benefit different types of contractors.

COIN HURTS many manufacturers of CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS, obviously!

What is so hard to understand there? If we divert money from building destroyers to training police in Afghanistan, (and the money is stolen by corrupt Afganis) please explain how this is good for ship builders and steel mills?

You seem convinced the defense industry is a cartoonishly evil hive mind. And clearly do not understand how it is structured or how it works.

This tends to be how most liberals and leftists view the defense industry.

[Nova Cyberia]

NASA's failures are largely due to its budget being raped over the years. SpaceX should have failed as a company years ago but it only still exists because of government subsidies.

NASA’s failures are just as much its risk adverse organizational culture, and poor management.
Its problems go much deeper than money. Throwing money at the SLS would not help, because the SLS is inferior.

Sure Space X gains money from government contracts, but it also builds better rockets CHEAPER than NASA.

Which is why you never want to only have one source to get your products from.

So we need a good balance and public private partnership.

It's easier to rely on outside contractors than it is to strengthen our own agencies. Poor management can be solved. That risk adverse culture is probably primarily due to them having smaller budgets to work with and not wanting to waste that money.

Also, does SpaceX even fall under the category of defense industry? I'm not entirely sure but I'm pretty certain they don't build weapons.

[New haven america]

Way to totally miss the point again.
The point is that different types of wars benefit different types of contractors.

COIN HURTS many manufacturers of CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS, obviously!

What is so hard to understand there? If we divert money from building destroyers to training police in Afghanistan, (and the money is stolen by corrupt Afganis) please explain how this is good for ship builders and steel mills?

You seem convinced the defense industry is a cartoonishly evil hive mind. And clearly do not understand how it is structured or how it works.

This tends to be how most liberals and leftists view the defense industry.

lol, you think I'm a liberal or leftist?

Well, if that's what you want to think, then I can't stop you, but I urge you to not make sweeping overgeneralizations as it doesn't help one's case while debating.

[Nova Cyberia]

Also, SpaceX probably isn't afraid to take risks because they know that no matter how much money they blow they can still rely on Uncle Sam to keep them in business.

Elon Musk literally sent a car into space. Did that actually get us anywhere? No. It was just some point that he personally wanted to prove.

[Nova Cyberia]

This tends to be how most liberals and leftists view the defense industry.

lol, you think I'm a liberal or leftist?

Well, if that's what you want to think, then I can't stop you, but I urge you to not make sweeping overgeneralizations as it doesn't help one's case while debating.

I do not have the time nor care to explain what I think to you. I will simply say that if that's what you want to think about me thinking that then that is your right and I have no power to stop you.

[New haven america]

lol, you think I'm a liberal or leftist?

Well, if that's what you want to think, then I can't stop you, but I urge you to not make sweeping overgeneralizations as it doesn't help one's case while debating.

I do not have the time nor care to explain what I think to you. I will simply say that if that's what you want to think about me thinking tjat then that is your right and I have no power to stop you.

Ok.

[Novus America]

NASA’s failures are just as much its risk adverse organizational culture, and poor management.
Its problems go much deeper than money. Throwing money at the SLS would not help, because the SLS is inferior.

Sure Space X gains money from government contracts, but it also builds better rockets CHEAPER than NASA.

Which is why you never want to only have one source to get your products from.

So we need a good balance and public private partnership.

It's easier to rely on outside contractors than it is to strengthen our own agencies. Poor management can be solved. That risk adverse culture is probably primarily due to them having smaller budgets to work with and not wanting to waste that money.

Also, does SpaceX even fall under the category of defense industry? I'm not entirely sure but I'm pretty certain they don't build weapons.

The risk adverse culture is more government agencies cannot go out of business. They have little incentive to innovate.
Poor management is hard to solve in government as a result.

If SpaceX fails to innovate, ULA and Blue Origin will beat them, and they lose their contracts. Not matter how much NASA fails it cannot go out of business.

And monopolies are bad for sourcing manufacturing. You want back ups.

Space X launches satellites for the DoD as well as civilian agencies and private corporations.

[Nova Cyberia]

I do not have the time nor care to explain what I think to you. I will simply say that if that's what you want to think about me thinking tjat then that is your right and I have no power to stop you.

Ok.

Thank you.

[Novus America]

Also, SpaceX probably isn't afraid to take risks because they know that no matter how much money they blow they can still rely on Uncle Sam to keep them in business.

Elon Musk literally sent a car into space. Did that actually get us anywhere? No. It was just some point that he personally wanted to prove.

Actually they cannot, because they have competition. The reason they take risks is they have too, the government can buy from someone else.

[Nova Cyberia]

It's easier to rely on outside contractors than it is to strengthen our own agencies. Poor management can be solved. That risk adverse culture is probably primarily due to them having smaller budgets to work with and not wanting to waste that money.

Also, does SpaceX even fall under the category of defense industry? I'm not entirely sure but I'm pretty certain they don't build weapons.

The risk adverse culture is more government agencies cannot go out of business. They have little incentive to innovate.
Poor management is hard to solve in government as a result.

If SpaceX fails to innovate, ULA and Blue Origin will beat them, and they lose their contracts. Not matter how much NASA fails it cannot go out of business.

And monopolies are bad for sourcing manufacturing. You want back ups.

Space X launches satellites for the DoD as well as civilian agencies and private corporations.

NASA did at one point innovate and they still are what with their plan to establish a permanent base on the moon and whatnot. And I'm not entirely adverse to using outside help but massive and greedy corporations like Boeing make me vomit.

[Novus America]

The risk adverse culture is more government agencies cannot go out of business. They have little incentive to innovate.
Poor management is hard to solve in government as a result.

If SpaceX fails to innovate, ULA and Blue Origin will beat them, and they lose their contracts. Not matter how much NASA fails it cannot go out of business.

And monopolies are bad for sourcing manufacturing. You want back ups.

Space X launches satellites for the DoD as well as civilian agencies and private corporations.

NASA did at one point innovate and they still are what with their plan to establish a permanent base on the moon and whatnot. And I'm not entirely adverse to using outside help but massive and greedy corporations like Boeing make me vomit.

Their moon base will probably never happen. They cannot even put a man in space anymore.
Sure NASA used to be good, but those days are past. Which is why we should not completely rely on them. You never want only one source to get things from.

But I agree with you the defense industry needs reform. The problem is the Clinton cuts caused most big defense contractors to fail, and be gobbled up by the few survivors. Leading to excessive consolidation and lack of competition.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Way to totally miss the point again.
The point is that different types of wars benefit different types of contractors.

COIN HURTS many manufacturers of CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS, obviously!

What is so hard to understand there? If we divert money from building destroyers to training police in Afghanistan, (and the money is stolen by corrupt Afganis) please explain how this is good for ship builders and steel mills?

You seem convinced the defense industry is a cartoonishly evil hive mind. And clearly do not understand how it is structured or how it works.

This tends to be how most liberals and leftists view the defense industry.

Stopped clock.

[Nova Cyberia]

NASA did at one point innovate and they still are what with their plan to establish a permanent base on the moon and whatnot. And I'm not entirely adverse to using outside help but massive and greedy corporations like Boeing make me vomit.

Their moon base will probably never happen. They cannot even put a man in space anymore.
Sure NASA used to be good, but those days are past. Which is why we should not completely rely on them. You never want only one source to get things from.

But I agree with you the defense industry needs reform. The problem is the Clinton cuts caused most big defense contractors to fail, and be gobbled up by the few survivors. Leading to excessive consolidation and lack of competition.

Well, breaking up massive companies like Boeing and then nationalizing at least some of the remnants would be a good start.

[Novus America]

Their moon base will probably never happen. They cannot even put a man in space anymore.
Sure NASA used to be good, but those days are past. Which is why we should not completely rely on them. You never want only one source to get things from.

But I agree with you the defense industry needs reform. The problem is the Clinton cuts caused most big defense contractors to fail, and be gobbled up by the few survivors. Leading to excessive consolidation and lack of competition.

Well, breaking up massive companies like Boeing and then nationalizing at least some of the remnants would be a good start.

At the very least we should do need to diversify our sourcing, and might need to force them to spin off some of their subsidiaries they acquired in the 90s.

I would rather keep the government out of too much acquisitions though, we do not want the government to be a monopoly on manufacturing either.

Mostly though we need to stop hiring so many PMC and private security guards and stuff.
Having contractors do jobs better done by real soldiers is something we do need to reduce.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Annex Mexico, yay or nay?

[Novus America]

Annex Mexico, yay or nay?

Yay. Would solve a lot of problems. It would not be cheap or easy to fix it up to our standards but it would be worth the long term investment.

I do not think we should suddenly invade though, instead we should use political influence and propaganda.
The rampant corruption there actually works in our favor.

[Grand Britannia]

Annex Mexico, yay or nay?

What if we take the mexicans and mexican border, and move it somewhere else.