Politics

RobertDyck · 2025-01-07 04:44:36

Trudeau convinced the Liberal Party to remove from their party constitution any way to remove their leader other than losing an election. So all the power was in his hands, nobody could do anything. And the woke lefties actually liked what he was doing. However, citizens did wake up when they felt the actual results. Cost of groceries has increased significantly due to the carbon tax. Restaurant meals have increased accordingly. Cost of housing has skyrocketed. Polls the last two years show Liberals will lose dramatically in next election. Caucus members and cabinet ministers realize they'll lose their jobs. The Liberal caucus was afraid to publicly criticize Trudeau because they could get kicked out of caucus and lose their nomination for the next election. But now they have nothing to lose, they have to change direction 180° if they hope to get re-elected. But frankly, it's too late.

Expect Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre to be sworn in as Prime Minister later this year.

kbd512 · 2025-02-09 16:33:43

Senator Joni Ernst has indicated that 30% to 40% of USAID's $63.1 billion dollar budget, according to what USAID told her, has gone to so-called "overhead" costs which have absolutely nothing to do with whatever the money has been earmarked for, whereas a "visual only inspection" (because the USAID organization would not allow her staff, which is tasked with USAID oversight, to take notes), indicated that the actual "overhead" figure was between 50% and 60%. If we don't have at least 51% of all the public money allocated to USAID, actually going to helping people in foreign countries, then my assertion is that USAID is not an actual aid organization, more of a money laundering operation and slush fund for pet projects. This is gross abuse of the public trust and theft of public money.

USAID directly funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology, in an amount of at least $40 million dollars in one payment, which was merely one payment made to them, and EcoHealth Alliance also used USAID to provide the Wuhan Institute of Virology with tens of millions of dollars of US equipment used to engineer designer viruses. The actual extent of the funding provided to Wuhan Institute of Virology remains unknown. President Obama's administration specifically forbade engineering of novel viruses on US soil or with US-sourced funding. When China claimed that the US created the virus, they weren't lying. The Chinese government executed most of the scientists involved in the project after learning about what they had done. I get the sense that China's government wasn't informed of what their lab was doing, and were largely ignorant of what took place there until the virus escaped from the lab, after which time they panicked and began covering up what transpired, believing that it would be viewed as a bioweapon. The lab was tasked with studying SARS viruses, but I don't think permission was ever given to start altering existing viruses to make them more virulent, or to specifically target human cells.

This tracks well with what we know about the Chinese national government's general level of ignorance about what goes on in individual provinces, as was the case when a casual off-hand comment made by President Biden during his visit, regarding electrical outages in one of the provinces, sparked a frenzy of activity after he spoke of this "simple objective reality" to President Xi. I have to wonder about how much of their internal problems are similar to our government's problems, caused by the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. It's a clear sign that the government has become too large and is unmanageable.

The US Inspector General's Office has refused to investigate this clearly fradulent use of American tax dollars, so President Trump has fired these fake "Inspectors" who are apparently not interested in performing investigations and audits of plainly criminal activities that were responsible for the murders of millions of people around the world. My guess is that many within our government, to include our politicians, won't like what we find.

Politico, MSNBC, and various other Democrat-run propaganda organizations have also received millions to tens of millions of dollars of tax money. This was apparently what was funding a lot of leftist media after their ratings tanked. The BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) publicly admits that 8% of their revenue comes from USAID.

Hillary and Bill Clinton's "Clinton Foundation", now run by Chelsea Clinton, was given $84 million dollars to provide aid to Haitians in Haiti. Less than 2% of that money, or $1.68 million dollars, actually went to providing assistance to Haitians.

$50 million dollars was spent sending condoms in Gaza. Who knows what that money was actually spent on, but that's what the claim is. I don't know what condoms cost, but according to one source that's enough money to purchase 1.5 billion condoms. There are around a million males in Gaza who could possibly use a condom, so that would provide 1,500 condoms for every Gazan male. I think that if they're going to have that much sex, perhaps they should determine how to feed themselves without outside assistance first. Call me crazy, but I think food is the bigger priority.

I'm also happy to report that we also have some 150 year old "very senior citizens" who have been collecting social security, which means they were born in 1875. Contrary to Democrats' constant claims to the contrary, we must have the absolute best health care system in the entire world for that to be true, since no other country on the planet has dozens of 150 year old citizens.

These are just a few of the highlights pertaining to what the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has found out about the USAID organization, US Department of Labor, and US Treasury Department.

On top of all that insanity, we now have a New York judge, Paul Engelmayer, attempting to prevent President Trump's Treasury and DOGE employees from accessing Treasury data, and has ordered DOGE to destroy the evidence of improper payments that they've already collected. For ongoing investigations, the only plausible reason to destroy evidence is to conceal a crime, which means this judge is attempting to use his power as a judge to prevent the Executive Branch from exercising oversight of the Treasury, which is also a federal crime. This was done late on Friday night, without the federal government being allowed to present their case, so there was no due process of law. Democrats in particular, seem terrified over the prospect of having their endless crime spree against the American people exposed for all the world to see.

If you were or are a Democrat voter, is this truly what you support?

What if our government started paying people with your tax money that you don't think need to receive your tax money?

For example, Burisma was going to receive a multi-million dollar payout from USAID after his son, Hunter Biden, became a member of Burisma's Board of Ethics.

If President Trump's son received a multi-million dollar payout from USAID, would you have a problem with that as a Democrat?

SpaceNut · 2025-02-10 08:22:59

I can see there is quite a bit of misuse of funds that are not questioned by the IG offices.Budget structures of agency operation all include operations overhead so not all funds got to the intended targeted use. It seems that OMB does not control the agencies overhead.

RobertDyck · 2025-02-10 20:57:34

OMG! What does Trump have against Canada? He's at it again! This time he imposed a tariff on all steel and aluminium. By far the most imported to the US comes from Canada. Canada exports steel to the US, and imports about the same amount from the US. Why? Specialization. Is it mild steel, or high carbon steel, or stainless steel, or some other alloy? Is it flat, bar, pipe, or other shape? Each foundry specializes, producing vast quantities of a few different products. Steel produced in Canadian foundries is different than those in US foundries. If Canadian steel were cut off, American foundries would sell smaller quantities of their current products, and have to start producing a larger variety of products, with only a small quantity sold of each product. That increases cost of everything. So why? Why is Trump doing this?

RobertDyck · 2025-02-10 22:21:53

One video on YouTube is a "hot mic" recording of Prime Minister Trudeau talking to other politicians. Trudeau believes Trump is serious about annexing Canada. Obviously not going to happen. Canadians want to be friends. Canada and the US are family. But Trump only understands strength. Canada's retaliatory tariffs put pressure on Republican Congressmen, who asked Trump to back off. But now steel and aluminium. Perhaps Canada has been to fight harder.

He's obsessed with military. Canada was included in development and manufacturing parts for the F-35 fighter jet. PMs Chétien and Martin agreed to development and manufacturing, but would not buy it. When Stephen Harper became PM, Lockheed-Martin tried to claim any country involved in dev & manufacturing just has to buy it. And when the US cancelled orders for the 2nd and 3rd batches of F-22, Lockheed-Martin drastically increased price of the F-35. When Trump became president the first time, he forced Lockheed-Martin to knock it off, reduce F-35 price to reasonable. But now Trudeau is PM. I understand Trudeau actually signed a purchase agreement. The F-35 has several issues, things that do not suit Canada. For one, any single engine aircraft is not allowed to fly over open water farther than gliding distance back to shore. In case the engine fails. That's why Canada never purchased the F-16. Canada has more shore than any country, period. Patrolling Canada's coast will be a major job of any fighter aircraft.

So here's hammer: cancel the order for F-35 fighters. I'm sure there's a cancellation penalty fee, but Canada could just say "screw you" and not pay it. Then purchase either the Eurofighter Typhoon or French Dessault Rafale. With all of Trump's threats, definitely not any American aircraft. There are only 3 aircraft in the world that meet the 1953 requirements for a Canadian all weather interceptor: F-22, Eurofighter Typhoon, and Russian Su-57. US Congress won't let the F-22 be exported outside the US. The Russian plane is... Russian. The French plane almost meets: requirements say it must supercruise at mach 1.5 at 50,000 feet with a full fuel load and full load of air-to-air missiles. Rafale can supercruise mach 1.4 with those requirements. Good enough? The aircraft must also have a large combat radius. This isn't a carrier aircraft, it's primary air force, and Canada has the second largest landmass in the world, second only to Russia. (Yes, the US is a close 3rd.) Canada doesn't have a lot of air bases in the north, so combat range must be significant. Both Eurofighter and Rafale meet those. Eurofighter has a higher ceiling and better dogfighting, but Rafale can carry a heavier bomb load when used for assault missions.

Perhaps most importantly, Canada wants most of the aircraft manufactured in Canada. That way the corporation pays corporate taxes to Canada. Workers pay income taxes to Canada, and when they buy stuff pay sales taxes. So the government can claw-back much of the cost as taxes. The French company Dessault has already offered to do this. Certain critical components will still be made in France, but most in Canada. And since Quebec has a major aerospace industry already, manuals don't even have to be translated from French.

Or just wait until the 6th generation European/Japanese GCAP is ready?

Ps. My girlfriend said we should tell Trump we're asking Russia if the would consider selling the Su-57. Don't even have to talk to Russia, just make Trump think we are.

kbd512 · 2025-02-11 09:18:40

RobertDyck,

The Royal Canadian Air Force has purchased 88 F-35A Lot 18 Block 4 combat jets, which include the latest software and airframe modifications allowing Canada's F-35 fleet to carry up to 6 AIM-120 or Lockheed-Martin's new AIM-260 missiles internally. The F-35 is the best deal you're going to get. I would be very happy to sell all of America's F-22s to Canada. We don't need them and some Canadians like you seem to think there's something magical about them. They're about 30 years out-of-date now, and even if we upgrade them with new electronics before we send them to you, and bring all airframes back to pristine condition, they still won't have the features of the F-35. If it makes Canadians "feel special", I would be thrilled to have Canada become the owner of all of them.

There was a legal policy that existed when the ATF project was initiated, which later resulted in the F-22, which stated that stealth tech would never be sold abroad. That policy eventually changed by the time the JSF project was initiated, so stealth technology could then be sold to friendly nations. We never went back and retroactively changed the policy that applied specifically to the F-117, F-22, and B-2 airframes. My guess is that nobody in Congress thought any other nation would want to purchase what are now very old aircraft requiring lots of labor to maintain.

Dassault Rafale-C: $245M
Lockheed-Martin F-22: $172M
Chengdu J-20: $110M
Boeing F-15EX Strike Eagle II: $90M to $97M
Saab JAS-39 Gripen: $85M
Lockheed-Martin F-35 Lightning II: $70M to $80 (A) to $120M (C) to $140M (B)
Eurofighter Typhoon: $80M to $90M
Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: $72M
Lockheed-Martin F-16 Block 70/72: $63M
Sukhoi Su-57: $35M to $54M

Ps: Ask your girlfriend if she knows why the Indians cancelled all of their Su-57 orders. The Su-57 is the least expensive jet on that list, but as far as I'm aware, only Algeria and Vietnam have expressed any interest in purchasing them. Algeria plans to buy 14 and Vietnam intends to buy 11. I'd say "go fo it", but don't turn around and claim you're doing anything except helping the Russians feed their war machine while they're invading Ukraine. After you realize that Russia can't and won't supply any spare parts or weapons to arm them, then you'll "know" why that idea was a serious mistake.

I'm beginning to understand why your own political party showed you the door.

RobertDyck · 2025-02-11 11:09:14

F-35 flies slower than F/A-18C Hornet. Or the Canadian version, CF-18 Hornet. You probably already know, but the only difference between the US Navy version vs Canadian is the paint job, the Canadian version has instruments calibrated in metric, and some instruments on the dashboard are in a different order. Whenever an upgrade was developed, it was sold to both the US Navy and Canadian air force. Oh, and the Canadian version has an ammunition loading door that has a window for a bright spotlight. The lamp is not installed, hasn't been since Canadian fighters got night vision equipment, but the window is still there.

Simulated dogfights between F-22 and MiG-35 show a 20:1 kill ratio in favour of the F-22. The F-35 is basically target practice. Stealth on the F-35 is much better. Russian radar may not be quite as good as American, but it's better than many Americans think. Yes they do have phases array. It's not as bad as 3rd world countries. Against Russian, F-35 may as well not have stealth.

One point I mentioned several times but you ignore, Canadian aviation regulations do not allow a single engine aircraft to fly over open water beyond gliding distance back to shore. That means F-35 is not allowed to patrol or engage in combat off Canada's coast. And Canada has a lot of coastline.

F-35 is not fast enough to intercept Tu-22M (including Tu-22M3) or Tu-160 bombers. A major job for any Canadian fighter jet is to intercept Russian bombers trying to fly over Canadian airspace. That's either to reach Canadian cities in the south, or the lower 48 states of the US. Yes, it's the job of our air force to cover your ass. So say "thank you" and stop blocking Canada from doing that job.

A video. This is an animation of a fictional encounter with a Russian Tu-160 flying over Canada. CF-18 can't reach it. F-35 can't reach it. Avro Arrow does. So many Canadians wish we still had this ability.
YouTube: AVRO ARROW vs F 35 & F 18

kbd512 · 2025-02-12 04:13:51

RobertDyck,

F-35 flies slower than F/A-18C Hornet.

Pure speed would matter a lot more if we're conducting WWII-style gun runs against enemy bombers, but we use missiles to chase down enemy aircraft so our fighter jets don't have to.

Yes they do have phases array. It's not as bad as 3rd world countries. Against Russian, F-35 may as well not have stealth.

Russia can't produce S-400 air defense missile battery radars that can find and shoot down Israeli F-35s that they know are coming, with comparatively unlimited antenna size and transmit power, but their MiG-35 radars will have no issue whatsoever with finding and dispatching F-35s?

That seems highly unlikely.

Simulated dogfights between F-22 and MiG-35 show a 20:1 kill ratio in favour of the F-22. The F-35 is basically target practice.

Russia has built a grand total of 6 production model MiG-35s. We've produced well over 1,000 F-35s. We can still simulate as many dogfights as you please after most of their jets are destroyed on the ground.

One point I mentioned several times but you ignore, Canadian aviation regulations do not allow a single engine aircraft to fly over open water beyond gliding distance back to shore.

Combat doesn't have any rules or regulations regarding which aircraft are allowed to fly over water.

Yes, it's the job of our air force to cover your ass. So say "thank you" and stop blocking Canada from doing that job.

If that giant chip on your shoulder ever gets too heavy to carry, you can always put it down.

This is an animation of a fictional encounter with a Russian Tu-160 flying over Canada. CF-18 can't reach it. F-35 can't reach it. Avro Arrow does.

I wasted my time watching a cartoonish depiction of a pointless kamikaze-like stunt that would most likely result in the destruction of the Arrow and the loss of its aircrew. I can tell you for a fact that we'd never do anything like the nonsense shown in that video.

RobertDyck · 2025-02-12 11:23:37

You keep claiming the F-35 is the greatest ever, despite the fact several developers said it's not. Particularly one of the engineers who developed F-16. And you keep ignoring the fact Canada's primary role for any fighter is defending Canada. The Arrow was developed to intercept and shoot down Russian bombers. Any replacement for Arrow has to do the same job. That does include intercepting Tu-160 bombers, which normally launch cruise missiles. Those bombers will have radar to detect F-35. And yes, I have read articles about the active phases array radar on MiG-35 aircraft. Russia built a few since, but the British RAF evaluation of various western fighters was.against MiG-35. Your claim they only built 6 MiG-35 aircraft is interesting, do you have a reference?

RobertDyck · 2025-02-12 11:41:44

A major point of my post on this thread was to fight back against Trump attacks on Canada. If this continues, America will be hurt. No one wins a trade war, everyone loses. Trump was pressured by other Republicans to back off from his 25% across the board tariff. Attacking steel and aluminium means he's at it again. He just doesn't get it. Being a bully does not make you look strong. Attacking your allies just makes you weak. All other allies see this, and will stop helping the US.

The European Economic Community was replaced by the European Union in November 1993. At that time it only included first world western European countries with modern economies. Total population was greater than the US, so Clinton was worried their economy would overshadow the US, becoming the major economic power in the world. To combat this he needed a to increase population to match. Canada has a major modem economy to match the US, but with a population only 1/9 the US, Canada's economy is also 1/9 the US. (Most people simplify and say 1/10.) That helped, and the US had a free trade agreement already with Canada, but more population was needed. So Clinton added Mexico, expanding the free trade agreement to become NAFTA. Mexico had a 3rd world economy, Canada did not want that, but Clinton pushed it through. Mexico increasing their economy at expense of Canada and the US, but recently their are a net positive. Europe absorbed eastern Europe after the Soviet Union collapsed, and that was a drag on their economy. But Germany as a strong economy again, they have modernized east Germany after reunification. Break-up of Yugoslavia was an issue, created a drain on Europe. The war was contained to Yugoslavia borders, but still was a drain on Europe. Trump doesn't seem to understand this. NAFTA is to expand the economy, to remain competitive. Attacking partners in NAFTA will only harm the US.

Calliban · 2025-02-12 15:54:17

People are getting poorer due to a combination of energy resource depletion and demographic ageing. Life is getting harder and people want uncompromising solutions. Trump thinks he can use tariffs to somehow insulate US citizens from the effects of this problem. It won't work, but it will always be popular with people on the hard end of real life. If Peter Zeihan is right about the impending collapse of China, then NAFTA needs to replace as much of what China produces as quickly as possible using a North American resource base. Tariffs on China might help accelerate this transition. Tariffs on other NAFTA members are a drag on it.

A breakdown of trade relations between the US, Mexico and Canada could hardly come at a worse time. I can fully understand that Trump is pissed with Trudeau and his cronies for opening the flood gates of mass immigration into North America. But Trudeau is on his way out anyway. And the left appear to be losing ground in Canada. Trump risks becoming the villain that they can rally Canadians against.

Last edited by Calliban (2025-02-12 16:01:45)

kbd512 · 2025-02-12 18:35:43

RobertDyck,

You keep claiming the F-35 is the greatest ever, despite the fact several developers said it's not. Particularly one of the engineers who developed F-16.

I never claimed that the F-35 was the greatest at anything, but it's a better fighting machine than the jets you keep comparing it to.

"Several developers" sounds exactly like "anonymous sources". Cite specific developers, cite what they've developed, and then cite their specific claims about the F-35. There were thousands of engineers who worked on the F-16 program, so provide a specific name and a specific claim. Generalities don't work here.

Try to set your personal feelings towards President Trump to one side. He's gone in 4 years. Love him or hate him, he's our President for the next 4 years only. Canada's defense issues will still be present in 4 years time. During war, people live or die on the basis of our ability to maintain rational analysis and decision making.

Any replacement for Arrow has to do the same job.

Canada is not trying to "replace" the Arrow, because it's a relic of a bygone era. You seem to believe that the Arrow must be replaced with the Arrow. The Canadian government and RCAF do not concur with your assertions.

Your claim they only built 6 MiG-35 aircraft is interesting, do you have a reference?

Why Did Russia's MiG-35 Program Fail With Only 6 Produced For An Aerobatic Team?

The MiG-35's upgraded features from the MiG-29 haven't attracted any buyers.
Russia has only produced 6 MiG-35s for a show team with no additional orders.
The Russian Air Force prefers focusing on the Su-30SM Flanker instead of the MiG-35.

Apart from the frequency with which Russian aerobatics pilots crash their jets at airshows, is Canada in any real danger from Russia's aerobatics team?

kbd512 · 2025-02-13 10:51:44

RobertDyck,

After you wrote "F-16 developer / engineer", I later thought back to Pierre Sprey, a very vocal critic of the F-35 who falsely claimed that the F-35 can't turn or dogfight because it has tiny wings. His claim was more applicable to the F-16 design that he worked on than the F-35 design, as basic math would indicate.

This is what a combat loaded F-16 looks like:
5f77bbf6-9b55-4202-a5f5-8bf185388955_aircraft-g463fcda57_1920.jpg

F-16s flying airshow demonstrations don't look like the jet shown above, because they're not equipped for combat. The F-16 shown above is carrying very large external fuel tanks and a mix of different air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles, but it could feasibly carry 6X AIM-120s and 18,250lbs of fuel. As depicted above, that F-16 is NOT going to be capable of 9g turns, nor is it particularly aerodynamic, because it's no longer the sleek little fighter it was in airshow configuration.

If you strip ALL exernal stores pylons, including the wingtip missiles, and load the F-16 with half as much fuel as the F-35A can carry internally, then and only then will a F-16C outpeform the F-35A in a dogfight. You have thus reduced the F-16's weapons loadout to what a WWII era fighter carries, but this is 2025, not 1945. In 2025, all well-equipped fighter jets carry multiple long range air-to-air missiles. Any F-16 so minimally equipped will have a very tough time fighting a stealthy F-35, which will be equipped with 6X AIM-120 missiles for an air superiority mission.

This is what a combat loaded F-35 looks like:

The giant external fuel tanks and missiles carried by the F-16 are not present beneath the F-35's wings, because the F-35 carries its fuel and weapons internally. The F-35A depicted above, the model that Canada will purchase, carries 6X AIM-120 internally and 18,250lbs of fuel. Even though the F-35 is not quite as sleek as a totally clean F-16, it will perform better in a real world dogfight than a F-16 carrying the same amount of fuel and weapons.

6X AIM-120: 2,136lbs
WA = Wing Area
EW = Empty Weight
IFW = Internal Fuel Weight
EFW = External Fuel Weight
FIF = Full Internal Fuel, no weapons
FIF+M = Full Internal Fuel plus Missiles
WL = Wing Loading

F-16C Block 52 Fighting Falcon
WA: 300ft^2; EW: 18,900lbs; IFW: 7,000lbs; EFW: 11,250lbs
Loaded Weight (18,250lbs fuel, 6X AIM-120): 39,286lbs
WL: 63lbs/ft^2 (EW); 86.33lbs/ft^2 (FIF); 130.95lbs/ft^2 (18,250lbs fuel* + missiles)

F-35A Lightning II
WA: 460ft^2; EW: 29,300lbs; IFW: 18,250lbs
Loaded Weight (18,250lbs fuel, 6X AIM-120): 49,686lbs
WL: 63.7lbs/ft^2 (EW); 103.37lbs/ft^2 (FIF); 108lbs/ft^2 (FIF+M)

F-15EX Strike Eagle II
WA: 608ft^2; EW: 34,600lbs; IFW: 23,324lbs (incl. CFTs)
Loaded Weight (23,324lbs fuel, 6X AIM-120): 60,060lbs
WL: 56.91lbs/ft^2 (EW); 95.27lbs/ft^2 (FIF); 98.78lbs/ft^2 (FIF+M)

F-35C Lightning II
WA: 668ft^2; EW: 34,581lbs; IFW: 19,750lbs
Loaded Weight (19,750lbs of fuel, 6X AIM-120): 56,467lbs
WL: 51.77lbs/ft^2 (EW); 81.33lbs/ft^2 (FIF); 84.53lbs/ft^2 (FIF+M)

*Note:
18,250lbs of fuel would represent the F-16 shown above with its pair of 600 gallon wing tanks and a partially full centerline tank. This is a combat configuration. The F-16's wing loading is significantly higher in this configuration. If you allocate 7,000lbs of fuel to both the F-16C and F-35A, plus missiles, then the F-35A's wing loading is lower than that of the F-16C, and the F-35C's wing loading is significantly lower.

Since a dogfight will take place at moderate subsonic speeds, which also represents the best maneuvering speed for all fighter jets, irrespective of type, the F-35A, F-35B, and F-35C will all out-turn the F-16C with an equal fuel load. The F-35 will also have superior nose-pointing ability at high-AoA if the fight goes vertical, and the F-35A will have a better thrust-to-weight ratio at equal fuel load, so it will recover energy faster than the F-16 or Super Hornet when you push the nose over.

Both the F-35A and F-35C have lower wing loading values than the F-16, unless we're talking about a F-16 with zero fuel and zero weapons. The moment we start adding fuel and weapons, the F-35 wins the wing loading argument decisively. The F-15, F-22, and Chengdu J-20 have lower wing loadings than the F-35A with equal fuel, but the Eurofighter Typhoon, Rafale-C, MiG-35, and Su-35S don't compare as favorably, even if their wing loadings appear similar or slightly lower than the F-35. The reason is pretty simple. The wings of the F-35 are NOT the only part of the airframe providing aerodynamic lift. The F-22, F-35, J-20, J-35, J-36, J-50, and Su-57 are all lifting body designs. In point of fact, every stealthy 5th and 6th gen fighter is a lifting body design, with a rough 60/40 split between wing lift and body lift. The actual lift split will vary by design, but the lifting body concept is now cemented- all nations fielding advanced fighters use this design principle because it works. That means they all have lower effective wing loading values than 4th gen fighters carrying equal fuel and weapons loadouts.

SpaceNut · 2025-02-15 07:29:40

Trump with the 2025 project play book is with Elon Musk try to run government like a business that is in trouble and people are the pawns in the game of business.
All the terminating will not help the government business function or improve as doing more with less staff does not work. Probable 300,000 plus will be fired and with accountability out the windows.

Void · 2025-02-15 10:53:28

If people who only possess the skills of the verbal and violence can be reassigned or removed from the levers of power, I am afraid I am for it. I am tired of the continuing rape of American that many of them have been involved in for decades.

Power typically is exercised by Aquisitioners (Business), Priests, Intellectuals, and Warlords. Putting the government though the washing machine periodically could be a good thing, I feel.

The Left has purged themselves of worthy priests, so they have brought this on themselves in that respect.

As for Intellectuals, the Verbal and Violent are false Intellectuals, they are more like evil priests, who claim godhood for their own selves and do not want to answer to a higher authority. Being able to talk and in effect mimic thought, is not sufficient to be an intellectual. Then resorting to Violence absent of a worth cause, is to damage society.

A society ruled by appointment as to be of a privileged class, is the problem. You go to an institution spend money and time are declared to be worthy. As an example Elon Musk may have done some of that, but his life is evidence that he has an intellectual worth.

Just being given a badge, does not make one worthy. Actual ability makes one worthy.

When badges of authority are for sale using fraud and kickbacks as payment for admission to power, then although the process is criminal, the even worse problem is idiots taking the levers of power.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-02-15 11:03:44)

kbd512 · 2025-02-16 03:04:24

SpaceNut,

Trump with the 2025 project play book is with Elon Musk try to run government like a business that is in trouble and people are the pawns in the game of business.

President Trump had to be told about what "Project 2025" actually is, because he'd never heard of it before the media told him he was going to implement it, and that we should all be very afraid. He's not reading from whatever script our anti-liberals are projecting onto him. All they do these days is projection- whatever their most sick and twisted thoughts are, that's what they ascribe to others, because they would be horrified by what they saw if they looked in the mirror and realized they were the ones hurting other people in the name of compassion. There are a few true green-eyed monsters out there, but most people are simply living in denial of reality about what they're doing with their lives, and when an outside force comes along that forces them to behave as they should, they first get very angry and incensed that someone is questioning the evil things they've done. Accountability is very hard to accept.

If you watch so-called liberal media, all they're doing is gaslighting you into thinking the sky is falling because now we're on a path towards accountability. If everything the Democrats were doing with public money was above-board, then they'd welcome an audit because it would show all the good things they've done using the money they were entrusted with. However, they know that's not what the audit will show, because they had the hubris to believe that nobody would ever question them or examine what they were doing. We found their public money theft and laundering operations, and they still feel entitled to what others have worked for, so they're very upset. That's just too bad for them.

All the terminating will not help the government business function or improve as doing more with less staff does not work. Probable 300,000 plus will be fired and with accountability out the windows.

Government functions best when it focuses on providing a few narrowly-defined core functions that it's obligated to provide by social contract with its people (our Constitution), and is not busy stealing your money to screw you over, or attempting to dictate every aspect of life to everyone else.

To wit:
1. The government is responsible for defending its people from all enemies (people who have declared or implied their intent to do us harm), both foreign and domestic. To that end, we have a standing Army, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, National Guard, State Guard, and the Police to do battle with adversarial nations and criminals on our behalf.
2. The government is responsible for making the law, enforcing the law, and adjudicating law. The government shall regulate acceptable civil behavior for activities deemed legal, so long as applicable rules and regulations are followed.
3. The government is responsible for promoting the general welfare of its citizens, not providing general welfare. This doesn't mean hand-outs, it means a hand-up.

The power of both the Republican and Democrat parties is waning, and good riddance to both of them. All President Trump and Elon Musk are doing is peeling off the shiny outer layer of BS to reveal the rotten core of our government.

Sabine Hossenfelder - I was asked to keep this confidential

If you don't like what you see, then pretend it's not real, or learn to make your peace with an uncomfortable reality that doesn't paint a pretty picture of all the things you put up on a pedestal. While Sabine was talking about public money being squandered by academia for what they freely but privately admit is idle pursuits which will be of use to no one, the same thing is going on within our federal and state governments. Based upon the expression on Sabine's face, she was thoroughly disgusted by these people in academia using public money to pretend to justify their continued employment for "the science", which, in their own candid words in private conversations between fellow scientists, is "utter BS".

Well... Now you know what's been going on in both academia and government. It's theft of public money for nonsense, brain rot, obscene filth being pushed onto the public as "compassion for others", and lots of other insanity that does not deserve the dignity of being labeled "governance" or "science" or "pursuit of knowledge" or "pursuit of truth".

Our government needs to shrink in size because it's sucking the life out of the economy to prop up its corruption and fraud schemes. When something has metastasized into a cancer killing its host (the American people), then you stop feeding it, cut it out, and begin the healing process. Government is not supposed to be a legalized method by which to rob Peter for purposes of paying Paul. If Paul wants money for his own purposes, then he can do what the rest of us do and get a job that someone is willing to pay him money to perform. If nobody is willing to pay Paul money to perform research that even he knows is an utter waste of time and money, then he can either perform meaningful research using what he knows, or he can get a new job doing something entirely different. Pretending to do something meaningful while knowing and even admitting in private that you're not, is not what academia should be doing with public money.

All the institutions that were "touched by a jackass", which includes academia, media, law / governance, and finance, need to have the guilty removed from their positions so that better men and women can do what they have failed to do.

I'm not the least bit concerned by our government laying off 300,000 employees. They get to experience what those of us in the private sector have experienced many times over due to their inability to be good stewards of the public money and to think of others before their own selfish interests.

The left was given every opportunity to correct their abhorrent behavior. Instead of taking the hint that they were going the wrong way, they resorted to name-calling, slander / libel, abuse of the legal system, theft of public money, and eventually, they resorted to violence. If this is how the left responds to people who disagree with them, then in time enough reasonable people will remove them from their positions of power, because they're unworthy of the public trust and faith placed in them to do what is right. Doing "what is right" is seldom what makes you "feel good". As Ben Shapiro would say, "Facts don't care about your feelings."

Your feelings do matter, but they matter to you, not necessarily to anyone else. The correct way to treat that "fact of life" is to stop trying to force the other party to conform to your viewpoints, and perhaps instead, to try to understand all viewpoints, even when you disagree with them. When you cease considering viewpoints that don't agree with your own, you stop being an intellectual and start becoming an ideologue. Ideology is good for a lot of things, but it's terrible when applied to matters that should be resolved using your head rather than your heart.

This could become a "teachable moment", as former President Obama would say, but I wager that the left will double-down on everything that ordinary Americans ultimately came to view as antithetical to continuing our way of life. The privileges we enjoy as Americans are underpinned by our shared values, and it's our obligation as Americans to uphold them. The left doesn't seem to adhere to those values any more, despite the fact that they once championed them when the right did not. They don't ask themselves what is best for everyone, but rather, what is best for them. Sometimes I'm not even sure that they do that much. When more than half the country doesn't share their viewpoints, it's time to change. The attempt to convince the majority of Americans that they were better off ignoring our most obvious problems did not work. When what you're doing is hurting the average American in service to a cause that blindly ignores the human wreckage it's created, then it's time for some introspection and examination about how we arrived where we're at.

I know we can do better. Let's go back to basics. When our government proves that it can do all the basic things it's tasked with doing, and does them well, or at least much better than what we've seen over the past four years, then we can think about what other roles government might fulfill, provided that the American people agree with having our government interjected into those other roles.

Calliban · 2025-02-16 08:22:28

China is absolutely tanking. Foreign investment in China is running at -30%, meaning that money is now rapidly flowing out of the place.
https://youtu.be/ncOhi6tZ5pY

A large part of the cause of this is bilateral restriction on investment and technology transfer from the US. However, even without these restrictions, Chinese demographics are now weighing heavily against its competitiveness. Domestic manufacturers are experiencing deflation, as the Chinese workforce is unable to buy enough Chinese products. This suggests that China is heading into a great depression. Anyone dependant upon China for anything they are using, needs to make alternative arrangements quickly. They aren't going to be in the game for much longer.

Last edited by Calliban (2025-02-16 08:23:59)

Void · 2025-02-16 10:52:29

Recalling materials from Peter Zeihan, the USA has something that many in this world now lack, a market.

But we have had a shortage of labor recently which contributes to inflation Reducing the number of prince and princess government jobs is logical, if they are not really producing things of value for our society. Such waste which seems apparent takes wealth away from Void, Spacenut, and others.

The Nixon/Kissinger>Regan>Service Jobs ploy was rather clever in its time. Beat down the American Union labor by exporting industry to East Asia. Then with cheaper "Stuff", you could afford to buy votes, by offering White Collar Princess and Prince jobs that give not only excess earnings for the value added from that labor, but also permit royal thinking that these pawns were of royalty themselves.

It may sound like I am very bitter about it, but I am just a little bit bitter. It will be their turn now, it seems. And at the time the ploy described above may have saved us, as they bought influence with China, by selling part of our market to them. This then helped pull them away from the Soviet Block. That could be why am not a mutated thing post nuclear war.

But many now say we have to reindustrialize. So, perhaps we can employ some princesses and princes, to be helpful somehow with robot labor? That might work for a while until the robots are fully developed.

So, we seem to have a need for more labor inside the USA, but most of the rest of the world is going to be competing to get into our market. I think the Orange Man knows this, and he likely understands what Optimus and its kind will represent.

The thing about humanoid robots, is that even if China invents a better robot, if they sell them to us, then they undercut their access to the American market. If they refuse to sell their better robots to us and to then lower their labor costs with them, we can block their access to our market.

And it is not mandated that they will make the best Humanoid Robots, but they might. But even then evidence that something can be done, gives guidance as to where to invest money. We would eventually get their trade secrets through time, or we would know that some special trick they did, could be worth investing in developing ourselves, as it is demonstrated to be possible.

So, Humanoid Robot labor seems likely to me to do the best for a country that has a labor shortage itself. And we seem to be in that situation.

The EU Europeans, and perhaps Canada, seem desperate to pull us into a repeat of WWI and WWII. I am not fond of that.

The Russia of today is not the USSR as per threat level. They are not likely to nuke us unless we provoke them sufficiently. China would seem to need access to our market. So, even with Tariffs, they likely have to deal with that reality.

I have thought at times that certain parties have been hoping that the USA and Russia would nuke each other. I guess their elites might think that they would have sufficient bunker space to take over after that. So, I do not think very kindly about these imagined demons.

If we make some sort of deal with Russia, then their oil will go on the markets again, but if we need to, we can put tariffs on that to protect our Hydrocarbon industry.

I do not know what the real game is with Canada and Mexico. But if nothing else we found out that Canada can be rather unfriendly. That will be considered.

My entire life I have lived in a world where the Europeans and Canadians have considered themselves above Americans. Well people do prefer their own kind often.

An example of this is the Viet Nam war. I am very suspicious that some of the Europeans lured us into that, hoping to damage us. You have to consider that even then considerable amounts of Europeans would have been leftists.

And then these various people watched while we tried to deal with it and the gloated about how much better they were than us.

But of course, some of the blame for that situation does fall on us for being so stupid.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2025-02-17 20:47:23)

RobertDyck · 2025-03-04 16:54:32

Donald Trump did it. Tariffs on Canada took effect one minute past midnight Eastern Time today. It's 25 on all goods, 10% on energy products. That includes oil, natural gas, and electricity. Tariffs are not paid by the source country, they are paid by the American company that imports goods. That company will pass those costs on to their customers, to American consumers. This will increase price of gasoline at the pump. Many Americans think most oil imports come from Saudi Arabia, but that's wrong. 60% comes from Canada, 7% from Mexico. Saudi Arabia is 3rd.

Canada has announced retaliation will begin today. This is bad. Very bad.

Trump claims this is about fentenyl, but roughly 1/10 of 1% comes from Canada. Trump demanded stronger action, so Canada did respond. Trump said there's nothing Canada can do to prevent these tariffs, which proves it has nothing to do with fentenyl.

Does Trump have a feud against Liberals? Canada is in the process of removing Liberals. Nothing can be done to get rid of them faster. Although polls over the last 2 years show Liberals will suffer an epic failure, Trump's threats and now tariff attacks on Canada only result in Canadians ralling behind the current government. Polls show support for Liberals dramatically increase. The more Trump attacks Canada, the more voters support Liberals. So if the goal is to get rid of Liberals, tell Trump to back off.

RobertDyck · 2025-03-04 17:04:23

Shoppes at liquor store today. Several shelves closes off with black plastic: all wine from USA, and fine wine from USA. Plastic curtain over a large part of the beer section, including the beer cooler: all USA beer. All USA products removed from rum section.

Dinner today: pierogies, holubtsi (cabbage rolls), kielbasa (garlic sausage).

tahanson43206 · 2025-03-04 18:05:29

For RobertDyck re tariffs...

Thanks for reporting on the response in your city!

As I read your report, it occurred to me that the store probably paid for the products that are blocked off from sale.

I wonder if there is any provision for return of unsold products to the US distributor.

If there ** is ** such an option, I wonder if tariffs work in reverse. I wonder if the US distributor would be obligated to pay the tariff on returned goods?

If so, would they deduct the tariff from the funds to be returned?

(th)

Calliban · 2025-03-04 19:57:08

Trump's tariffs are a tax on US consumers. They are not a tax on Canadian exporters. I cannot see this being good for anyone, least of all the US. Tariffs on China make some sense, as North American producers need to replace Chinese imports before Mother Nature calls time on the Chinese economy. But tariffs on Canada and Mexico? One is a bulk commodity producer that the US needs smooth economic relations with. The US needs lumber, heavy oil, uranium, rare earths. If producers have to pay more for these things because of tariffs, then producer prices go up, fuelling inflation. Mexico is industrialising fast, with a reasonably skilled, middle income workforce. The US needs Mexico as a manufacturing economy, able to fill the price points that US labour is too expensive for. A well integrated NAFTA could do most of what China does today. But none of that works without easy cross-border trade between all three countries.

Additional: If Fentanyl is manufactured using freely available (legal) ingredients, what does Trump expect Canada to do?

Last edited by Calliban (2025-03-04 20:04:56)

RobertDyck · 2025-03-04 20:21:33

Trump has been played by Putin. On a group of MAGA people, one person claimed Russia has lower tax than Canada or the US. According to Wikipedia, most revenue to the Russian federal government becomes from corporations. 73% comes from taxes and tariffs from the oil industry alone. Individuals in Russia pay only 13% income tax. Well... average income in Russia is US$14,771 per year. In Canada (after converting to US dollars), there is zero income tax in the first $10,881 then 15% on the remaining balance up to $39,3752 (the start of the 2nd tax bracket). There are 5 tax brackets, but look at how much a Russian earns. So who has lower tax? Yes, Canada also has provincial income tax, but I don't know how oblast taxes work in Russia. In fact, the average income for a working individual in Russia would be considered below the poverty line in Canada.

The interesting part of this is the Russian government makes a great deal of its income from tariffs. And Russia claims their tax rate is lower than America. So Donald Trump wants to create tariffs to earn revenue so he can deeply cut taxes for his rich buddies. Russia has higher income tax for individuals who earn more, similar to tax brackets, but they don't talk about that. And in one press conference a reporter tried to explain to Trump that Americans pay the tariff, not foreign countries. Trump didn't believe it. He thinks Canada will pay his tariffs on Canadian goods. All sounds like Putin is playing him.

RobertDyck · 2025-03-06 20:35:44

Today Trump partially makes down. He gave a "pause" until April 2 for any Canadian products fully in compliance with the USMCA. That means complicated nation of origin rules to be entirely duty free. The LCBO is the retail liquor stores in Ontario. It's the largest liquor buyer in the world. Ontario Premier said LCBO will not restore US products on shelves until all tariffs against Canada are lifted, and it's permanent. I live in the province of Manitoba, the notice on their website says they no longer sell US products.

Doesn't Trump realize he's a puppet of Putin? Attacking US allies will make the US weaker. Attacking US trade partners makes US economic sphere smaller, making the US poorer. Putin wants the US isolated, weak, and poor. Why the hell would anyone go along with this?

RobertDyck · 2025-03-06 20:41:59

NPR: Did tariffs contribute to the Great Depression? Here's what to know

The tariffs implemented under the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act worsened the Great Depression, Richardson, Clarke and Witcher say. These tariffs also strained relationships with other countries beyond the realm of trade.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#2751 2025-01-07 04:44:36

Re: Politics

#2752 2025-02-09 16:33:43

Re: Politics

#2753 2025-02-10 08:22:59

Re: Politics

#2754 2025-02-10 20:57:34

Re: Politics

#2755 2025-02-10 22:21:53

Re: Politics

#2756 2025-02-11 09:18:40

Re: Politics

#2757 2025-02-11 11:09:14

Re: Politics

#2758 2025-02-12 04:13:51

Re: Politics

#2759 2025-02-12 11:23:37

Re: Politics

#2760 2025-02-12 11:41:44

Re: Politics

#2761 2025-02-12 15:54:17

Re: Politics

#2762 2025-02-12 18:35:43

Re: Politics

#2763 2025-02-13 10:51:44

Re: Politics

#2764 2025-02-15 07:29:40

Re: Politics

#2765 2025-02-15 10:53:28

Re: Politics

#2766 2025-02-16 03:04:24

Re: Politics

#2767 2025-02-16 08:22:28

Re: Politics

#2768 2025-02-16 10:52:29

Re: Politics

#2769 2025-03-04 16:54:32

Re: Politics

#2770 2025-03-04 17:04:23

Re: Politics

#2771 2025-03-04 18:05:29

Re: Politics

#2772 2025-03-04 19:57:08

Re: Politics

#2773 2025-03-04 20:21:33

Re: Politics

#2774 2025-03-06 20:35:44

Re: Politics

#2775 2025-03-06 20:41:59

Re: Politics

Board footer