Trump & Air Force I

[wittmeba]

The media and others are fussing about Trump and his comments about Air Force I orders. I commend him for his thoughts. This might be the first really big financial move.

The first thing I thought about was "Dave" movie -- attempting to fix financial issues by just paying attention and cutting costs where there is so much waste.

I would certainly bet Obama and Hillary would just let it slide on through.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/06/us/po ... .html?_r=0

[ShotgunBlast]

I liked "Dave" as well, but I'm not sure I feel comfortable with the POTUS flying around using tech from the 1980s. Air Force One isn't a traditional plane, and all of those bells and whistles cost money. I'm not sure this is the line item to be cutting.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Ironbear]

It is sad when $4 billion seems like a drop in the bucket. There are probably better places to start than AF-1.

The core problem is that core purpose of government has become the protection of bureaucratic fiefdoms!

Pentagon Hid Study That Exposed $125 Billion in Waste
http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/12/pe ... -in-waste/

"But some Pentagon leaders said they fretted that by spotlighting so much waste, the study would undermine their repeated public assertions that years of budget austerity had left the armed forces starved of funds. Instead of providing more money, they said, they worried Congress and the White House might decide to cut deeper."

Let's see... exposing your financial incompetence might jeopardize your ability to get even more money to be incompentent with!? I guess they are not completely stupid even if they are incompetent!

[SHMIV]

It's been a while since I've seen it, but I seem to recall liking "Dave", as well.

I actually am comfortable with POTUS flying around in an old plane. As far as I'm concerned, POTUS can fly coach, with the rest of us.

It's interesting that Air Force One came into question; TBH and I had been wondering if Trump had planned to continue using his own plane and helicopter, or if he had intended to step down to government transport.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Rualert]

I do get where he is coming from, but on the other hand I also have a clue as to why the AF1 fleet of planes cost what they do. When you consider the ability to take off almost straight up at a very high rate of speed, self protections from external surface and air attacks, the level of shielding needed to withstand the electromagnetic pulse from a nuke going off and frying all your controls, in flight refueling, you get the idea, it's not just another 747. We build the "Beast" for their ground transport, so it's not much of a stretch that the planes and choppers are also heavily armored, and resistant to attack. A bit pricey yes, but not average in any way. I had some friends down in Sarasota on 9/11 and they told me they never saw a plane that big take off like that ever. It was a sight to behold.