4 ms·

Like the TSA, spaceforce is just another government employment program. I'd prefer we waste less on the performative function and just pay more in entitlements.

alephnerd 2y ago
Geospatial intelligence collection and analysis is extremely important, but before the USSF, this capability and mission was disjointed across multiple branches. Furthermore, where should missiles lie? This distracts from the Army, Navy, and AF's core missions. This is why ALL countries are constituting their own "Space Force" or "Rocket Force" - to manage missiles and geospatial intel gathering.
- mistrial9 2y ago
  one quarter of countries worldwide do not make or publish basic national statistics. Countries are political-economic entities and carry huge historical technical debt.. bombastic declarations about "all countries" are hallmark to shallow thinking
- michaelt 2y ago
  Back when nuclear weapons were relevant, every service wanted them. The air force wanted bombers and ground-based missiles. The navy wanted submarine-launched missiles. Even the army got in on it, with nuclear artillery. Why have we waited until missiles are fading from relevance, years after the end of the cold war, and only now decided they need their own branch?
  - actionfromafar 2y ago
    Not to be snarky (ok, yes) - when did nuclear weapons become irrelevant exactly? Is it because of their irrelevance NK and Iran tries to get them?
    - michaelt 2y ago
      At the end of the cold war. In the present day, a launch is inconceivable. That's why we don't much care if the missile crews sitting around in underground bunkers are napping, playing xbox, wearing pyjamas, taking LSD and cheating on their proficiency exams. And the fact there won't be a launch is a great thing - No reasonable person would enjoy it if mutually assured destruction was to occur.
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    Missiles are still relevant. Basically, most countries need a dedicated org to manage A2AD and Geospatial strategy - Missiles, Rockets, Satellites, you name it. Before the USSF the closest thing to this was a couple sub-departments within the USAF, US Army, and USN plus the NGA (which is just a supporting agency). This has been something on the books for decades now [0] [0] - https://www.comw.org/qdr/fulltext/1002QDR2010.pdf https://www.comw.org/qdr/fulltext/1002QDR2010.pdf
    - klez 2y ago
      I suppose USAA is a typo, and since I'm trying to widen my knowledge on the subject, what did you mean instead?
      - InitialLastName 2y ago
        I think you can be charitable and assume they meant US Army (which has the somewhat contextually ambiguous acronym "USA").
      - alephnerd 2y ago
        US Army, was too lazy to type and USA feels too on-the-nose
howeyc 2y ago
US Defense spending is a US employment program. I really wish we would drop the pretense and just make it a full employment jobs program. Anyone that wants to work should be able to get a job. The private sector can then get employees by paying above the minimum wage offered by the defense department job program.
- m101 2y ago
  This would be a terrible idea for all sorts of reasons. I will start with a few questions. How would you determine the wage level of the govt? How would you differentiate pay at the govt? How would you prevent govt sector bloat and excessive spending? How would you ensure people put in the work required at the govt if they were guaranteed a job?
  - howeyc 2y ago
    1. Federal min wage would be a good place to start. 2. Uh, the same as now? Just because you work for the government doesn't mean you earn min eage. I'm pretty sure Generals make more than $15k per year. 3. People that have jobs spend money in the economy to buy things. Private sector economy benefits from this. 4. You would have to do tasks to get paid. It's a job if you want it. Not forced. The idea is to curb unemployment.
    - m101 2y ago
      Unemployment is not a bad thing per se. Unemployment for a long time for an individual seeking employment is a bad thing.
  - fragmede 2y ago
    Government pay scales is public knowledge. You'd pay based on seniority and function. You'd have an outside committe audit the jobs. You'd have KPIs and fire people that weren't performing, same as you would at a business. The government already exists and has solved these problems before, I don't know why explicitly having jobs programs would be any different. Calling for UBI is a failure of imagination. As a society we should take care of those on the lowest rungs of the ladder, but there's more than enough work and thus jobs out there to be done, the only problem is funding them. If the government paid out $100 for every tree planted, we'd do well for the environment and have a whole lot more gardeners.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
abduhl 2y ago
What is the substantive difference between a government employment program and entitlements in your view? Is it that people don't have to do the performative function of working for an entitlement? Note that Social Security, pretty much the leading entitlement program, requires that you pay into it before being able to draw.
delfinom 2y ago
Space Force is an actual military branch now just like the Air Force, Navy or Army. It isn't an employment program because it's no different than the other branches. You have to go through all the standard army training, bootcamp, rules, etc.

alephnerd 2y ago

Geospatial intelligence collection and analysis is extremely important, but before the USSF, this capability and mission was disjointed across multiple branches. Furthermore, where should missiles lie? This distracts from the Army, Navy, and AF's core missions. This is why ALL countries are constituting their own "Space Force" or "Rocket Force" - to manage missiles and geospatial intel gathering.

mistrial9 2y ago
one quarter of countries worldwide do not make or publish basic national statistics. Countries are political-economic entities and carry huge historical technical debt.. bombastic declarations about "all countries" are hallmark to shallow thinking
michaelt 2y ago
Back when nuclear weapons were relevant, every service wanted them. The air force wanted bombers and ground-based missiles. The navy wanted submarine-launched missiles. Even the army got in on it, with nuclear artillery. Why have we waited until missiles are fading from relevance, years after the end of the cold war, and only now decided they need their own branch?
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  Not to be snarky (ok, yes) - when did nuclear weapons become irrelevant exactly? Is it because of their irrelevance NK and Iran tries to get them?
  - michaelt 2y ago
    At the end of the cold war. In the present day, a launch is inconceivable. That's why we don't much care if the missile crews sitting around in underground bunkers are napping, playing xbox, wearing pyjamas, taking LSD and cheating on their proficiency exams. And the fact there won't be a launch is a great thing - No reasonable person would enjoy it if mutually assured destruction was to occur.
- alephnerd 2y ago
  Missiles are still relevant. Basically, most countries need a dedicated org to manage A2AD and Geospatial strategy - Missiles, Rockets, Satellites, you name it. Before the USSF the closest thing to this was a couple sub-departments within the USAF, US Army, and USN plus the NGA (which is just a supporting agency). This has been something on the books for decades now [0] [0] - https://www.comw.org/qdr/fulltext/1002QDR2010.pdf https://www.comw.org/qdr/fulltext/1002QDR2010.pdf
  - klez 2y ago
    I suppose USAA is a typo, and since I'm trying to widen my knowledge on the subject, what did you mean instead?
    - InitialLastName 2y ago
      I think you can be charitable and assume they meant US Army (which has the somewhat contextually ambiguous acronym "USA").
    - alephnerd 2y ago
      US Army, was too lazy to type and USA feels too on-the-nose

howeyc 2y ago

US Defense spending is a US employment program. I really wish we would drop the pretense and just make it a full employment jobs program. Anyone that wants to work should be able to get a job. The private sector can then get employees by paying above the minimum wage offered by the defense department job program.

m101 2y ago
This would be a terrible idea for all sorts of reasons. I will start with a few questions. How would you determine the wage level of the govt? How would you differentiate pay at the govt? How would you prevent govt sector bloat and excessive spending? How would you ensure people put in the work required at the govt if they were guaranteed a job?
- howeyc 2y ago
  1. Federal min wage would be a good place to start. 2. Uh, the same as now? Just because you work for the government doesn't mean you earn min eage. I'm pretty sure Generals make more than $15k per year. 3. People that have jobs spend money in the economy to buy things. Private sector economy benefits from this. 4. You would have to do tasks to get paid. It's a job if you want it. Not forced. The idea is to curb unemployment.
  - m101 2y ago
    Unemployment is not a bad thing per se. Unemployment for a long time for an individual seeking employment is a bad thing.
- fragmede 2y ago
  Government pay scales is public knowledge. You'd pay based on seniority and function. You'd have an outside committe audit the jobs. You'd have KPIs and fire people that weren't performing, same as you would at a business. The government already exists and has solved these problems before, I don't know why explicitly having jobs programs would be any different. Calling for UBI is a failure of imagination. As a society we should take care of those on the lowest rungs of the ladder, but there's more than enough work and thus jobs out there to be done, the only problem is funding them. If the government paid out $100 for every tree planted, we'd do well for the environment and have a whole lot more gardeners.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

abduhl 2y ago

What is the substantive difference between a government employment program and entitlements in your view? Is it that people don't have to do the performative function of working for an entitlement? Note that Social Security, pretty much the leading entitlement program, requires that you pay into it before being able to draw.

delfinom 2y ago

Space Force is an actual military branch now just like the Air Force, Navy or Army. It isn't an employment program because it's no different than the other branches. You have to go through all the standard army training, bootcamp, rules, etc.