Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Ray(theon) Gun
Topic Started: Jul 20 2010, 12:40 PM (190 Views)
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTpP412fM8U




U.S. Navy Successfully Uses Laser to Shoot Down Drones

The U.S. Navy has used a a laser weapon to shoot down four unmanned aerial vehicles in a test that rings up memories of Ronald Reagan's "Star Wars" missile defense shield in the 1980s.

The successful test of the Laser Weapon System off the coast of California was announced during the Farnborough International Air Show, which is taking place this week in England.

The technology, jointly developed with Raytheon, used industrial strength lasers, is more than just your run-of-the-mill PR exercise. In its write-up of the technology, Scientific American correctly notes that the shoot-down of the drones over water constitutes an advance over previous Raytheon tests which focused on static targets.
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kincaid
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
I'm sure we'll be cancelling that research soon. Got to pay for the unemployment bennies for millions of Americans, you know!
Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Piano*Dad
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
Nah, we can still walk and chew gum at the same time.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Kincaid
Jul 20 2010, 12:41 PM
I'm sure we'll be cancelling that research soon. Got to pay for the unemployment bennies for millions of Americans, you know!
If you have to choose one today, which one do you think would better serve America's interest?

Every dollar you spend paying out for unemplyment bennies, anywhere between $0.90 and $1.60 got cycled back into the general economy (got this from some article that claims that the CBO said so ... too lazy to go look up the original source).

Every dollar you spend developing laser to shoot down flying drones will get you what? You think the likes of Al Qaeda or Hamas or Herzbolla are going to have drones anytime soon? How much longer (and how much more money) before the laser technology can be developed to a point where it can shoot down those "home made rockets" made by the likes of Al Qaeda or Hamas or Herzbolla? May be you're expecting the ex-Commies (Russia and China) to send drones to spy on us? :shrug:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
I don't care where you get your statistics, paying people not to work does nothing for the economy. Nothing.

Beating our swords into food stamps does nothing for the economy or our security. Nothing.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
And the dollars spent on Raytheon go back into the economy as well, putting a whole lot of people TO WORK at well paying jobs.
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Piano*Dad
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
Mikhailoh
Jul 21 2010, 03:59 AM
And the dollars spent on Raytheon go back into the economy as well, putting a whole lot of people TO WORK at well paying jobs.
So you really do think that government spending on this sort of job and that sort of company generates long run growth for the economy. Well then, young man, Obama and his team ought to be the ones to determine where everyone works and which companies should expand. Heck, even that leftie Krugman only thinks of government 'stimulus' as a very short run way to restore confidence, and then the private economy ultimately determines which jobs and companies emerge and prosper, and which jobs and companies die.

Thinking about defense or R&D spending in terms of Keynesian multipliers or as jobs programs is not exactly a conservative approach (or a sensible one, for that matter) to managing the national economy.

Ax's argument is about stimulus. You don't beat him with a proposition that considers national defense as stimulus. It's not. There is no good argument for long run national defense spending as macroeconomic stimulus.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
Which program puts more people to work, PD? The argument is not whether the defense programs are 'Keynesian multipliers'. It is this program versus additional unemployment compensation.

Which one has even a prayer of building wealth? If putting money into this program that benefits an American company has no beneficial effect on the economy, exactly how then does ANY government spending do so?
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KlavierBauer
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Ax: Terrorist organizations DO have drones. It's not solely a U.S. niche - many private companies in other countries produce drones and sell them to whomever. I just read an article about the number of drones being used by militant groups in Iran and the surrounding area.
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper
"He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Piano*Dad
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
Mikhailoh
Jul 21 2010, 06:20 AM
Which program puts more people to work, PD? The argument is not whether the defense programs are 'Keynesian multipliers'. It is this program versus additional unemployment compensation.

Which one has even a prayer of building wealth? If putting money into this program that benefits an American company has no beneficial effect on the economy, exactly how then does ANY government spending do so?
Who said anything about 'no beneficial effect.' The difference is between short run stimulus and long run resource allocation. Defense research isn't best thought of as stimulus. It's a choice to take in tax dollars from people, tax dollars that they would have allocated to firm X and savings account Y, and to use those dollars to buy the output of a different firm Z (Raytheon, in this case). There is no automatic case for why spending on Raytheon's wares is better for the economy, or even for long run R&D, when compared with how those same resources would have been allocated by the public. You make your case for taxing people to pay for Raytheon contracts by reference to the state's goals, knowing full well that there is a cost in terms of foregone opportunity.

You make a case for unemployment compensation based on equity arguments, and on their ability to stimulate demand in a time of recession. I will bet $ to doughnuts that a dollar of spending on unemployment compensation adds more to demand than a dollar of military spending on Raytheon contracts. That, however, would not stop me from approving the spending on Raytheon if I were convinced that those tax dollars were well allocated. I just wouldn't try to justify it as part of recession fighting.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Piano*Dad
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
... and to amplify the point ....

The 'employment effect' of this defense spending is virtually nil. You cannot tote up the number of jobs supposedly 'created' by a dollar of defense spending and say, 'there, we've added jobs to the economy.' That's a complete fallacy. An overwhelming percentage of the wage bill at firms like Raytheon (70-80%) goes to groups (engineers, for instance) whose structural unemployment rate is pretty close to zero. Jobs in defense areas 'created' by extra defense spending are jobs 'lost' to other parts of the economy, and these 'lost jobs' are ones you would never know about because they have been aborted by the government directed program.

As I said, you judge whether those aborted jobs are a fair price to pay by evaluating what you think the social contribution of the defense spending might be. You don't think of the 'new' jobs at Raytheon as net new jobs for the economy, because they aren't.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply