8 ms·
I understand why it costs this much. I don't understand why we think it is worth doing. Rather than fabricate a flying White House, why not deputize the vice pr
by atdt 6y ago
I understand why it costs this much. I don't understand why we think it is worth doing. Rather than fabricate a flying White House, why not deputize the vice president to carry out presidential duties while the president is in the air? There is a well-defined presidential line of succession that exists expressly to ensure continuity of government in case the president is incapacitated. Why reserve its use for emergencies? We can use it routinely.
Use the $5 billion to build housing for homeless people.
- pm321 6y ago"Use the $5 billion to build housing for homeless people." Homeless people are outside the circle of social distance and, therefore, social sympathy. Just sayin' the way to lower the cost is to produce more and sell more reprints of the manual at scale.
- kgin 6y agoFinding housing for homeless people isn't a money problem. We just don't want to do it. We find/print money for things we want to do.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> I understand why it costs this much. I don't understand why we think it is worth doing. Rather than fabricate a flying White House, why not deputize the vice president to carry out presidential duties while the president is in the air? We have a national airborne command post, ultimately, in case the ground based command (the White House) is destroyed or under imminent threat requiring it to be (temporarily or permanently) abandoned. It's used for routine transport, and command and control while being used for routine transport, since it is desirable for it to be near the C-in-C at all times, and it doesn't make much sense not to use it.