Just another billion dollars

[Locutus]

These idiots sure play loose with others money eh?


Ignatieff plucks another billion from the money tree

Another day, another $1-billion committed by the Liberals — this time a re-announcement of the family care plan that will give Canadians leave benefits, if they care for ill family members at home. Pretty soon, we’re going to be talking real money.

But while Michael Ignatieff has waxed lyrical about his safety net for seniors and families, one word has been conspicuous by its absence — jobs.

In London, he was asked if it is fair to say that wealth generation is not top of his agenda. He answered that the Liberals have the “best and most effective job program — making sure young Canadians get an education and full-time training.”


more...

John Ivison: Ignatieff plucks another billion from the money tree | Full Comment | National Post

[dazed&confused]

Well when you consider the potential wastage of up to what oh about 13B on F35's if the Cons get back. 1B for family care is a drop in the bucket if the Libs get in.

[Mark]

Well when you consider the potential wastage of up to what oh about 13B on F35's if the Cons get back. 1B for family care is a drop in the bucket if the Libs get in.

The F35's are not a waste. They just seem like a waste because you're not patrolling a Libyan No-Fly-Zone in a 30 year old jet.

[CDNBear]

The F35's are not a waste.

Mark, I was behind that thought 100% a week ago. But we could have bought the Super Hornet cheaper and still had the same benefit to Canadian aerospace industries.

They just seem like a waste because you're not patrolling a Libyan No-Fly-Zone in a 30 year old jet.

Now that's a fact!

[dazed&confused]

The F35's are not a waste. They just seem like a waste because you're not patrolling a Libyan No-Fly-Zone in a 30 year old jet.

As Bear said they could have gone with a jet that the armed forces are already familiar with & includes up to date technologies @ <40% (55M) of the cost & still have two engines while patrolling the north. How much thinking went into that choice?
We got stealth, we got stealth lets get this..... oh we got only one engine not to worry, look at all the bells & whistles, we can turn into a heavy glider if we loose the engine.

[CDNBear]

we can turn into a heavy glider if we loose the engine.

And not pick up on radar as it goes down, lol.

[Mark]

As Bear said they could have gone with a jet that the armed forces are already familiar with & includes up to date technologies @ <40% (55M) of the cost & still have two engines while patrolling the north. How much thinking went into that choice?
We got stealth, we got stealth lets get this..... oh we got only one engine not to worry, look at all the bells & whistles, we can turn into a heavy glider if we loose the engine.

Sounds like talking points to me. The Wing Command are the ones who said they want it. Rather than some white metal fiberglass piece of crap built by a Quebec based company that pandered to an MP who could not give a shit about the safety or tactical worthiness of our airman. We are sending them to war, they deserve the best we can give them.

These F35's will be around a long time and I might add buying our military something state of the art is never going to be low on my priority list. As I said before the jets they are flying now were built before Home Computers were a reality. Well..., Unless you consider Commodore VIC 20 a home computer.

You are living in a Justin Trudeau Liberal Utopia if you think that any armed forces acquisitions are strictly for defense of the North.

[dazed&confused]

You know its funny thats the same type of argument I heard back in the 80's when the CF18 was chosen. F14's & 15's were deemed too expensive, Tornado too Euorpean so that left the F16 (from which the F35 is based) was single engine & the F18 which god forbid a Navy aircraft. So in the end little sanity came about and the CF18 was born.
Yes the performance of F16 was superior than the 18 but the 2 engine safety factor won out.
Now thirty years down the road of course Wing Command is going to want an aircraft with superior performance, particularly when the F35 advertised as a 5th Generation Aircraft they'd be a little short on insight if they didn't.
Unless we are consistantly in a state of war it serves no real purpose to have a leading edge aircraft. The Super Hornet should be able to fill the role Canada plays quite adequately. Yes there is some drop off in performance but that is somewhat balanced by familiarity of the aircraft (maybe my point is selfdefeating here with the old adage "familiarity breeds contempt"), the fact it has two engines & the fact it costs less. (Oh! those are pretty much the same factors the Mulrooney Cons came up with orginally to choose the 18).

[Mark]

Unless we are consistantly in a state of war it serves no real purpose to have a leading edge aircraft. The Super Hornet should be able to fill the role Canada plays quite adequately.

Define War?

Bosnia, Croatia, Somalia, Gulf War One, Afghanistan. Dazed war is a word used by politicians to either credit or discredit. Operational is a term used by commanders who have been deployed to one spot or another under the guise of political jargon. We will continue to be operational for the foreseeable future.

[CDNBear]

Define War?

Bosnia, Croatia, Somalia, Gulf War One, Afghanistan. Dazed war is a word used by politicians to either credit or discredit. Operational is a term used by commanders who have been deployed to one spot or another under the guise of political jargon. We will continue to be operational for the foreseeable future.

Mark, please give me a no BS answer here bud.

Between the Super Hornet and the 35, which would you go with?