PRESIDENT TRUMP

Speaking of useless education. The schools really does their best to fool gullible people into picking their school with educations that prepare you for absolutely nothing, but sounds interesting (to some).
Theatre Arts? More like dishwasher arts.
Philosophy? Think hard about all the burgers you'll flip. Might give a job as a philosophy teacher. Hurray, you can educate more burger flippers.
Art Therapy? Just what.
And Gender Studies. Special snowflakes has been on the rise, and so Gender Studies has become alot more common. One of the worst educations for getting any job except blogging about X oppressing the blogger or becoming an expert on absolutely nothing on TV. I'd take basket weaving over that any day of the week.

author=Kaem
The individual men and women who make their living in the military are a benefit to the economy, but graft and corporate greed are having serious, huge ramifications on the overall picture.

Oh, hell yes.

author=Kaem
I read that piece about the carrier groups. The problem with the idea that a carrier group is deployed to "deter" China is that China has a $1m cruise missile that can accurately destroy a carrier in a single strike, and the US Navy has zero counter-measures against top-down cruise missiles. The range of the Chinese missile extends far beyond the sea of Japan...It's only a matter of time until Russia has one, as well.

Not only are there fundamental problems with the so called 'carrier killer' (including but not limited to the spoiler tag below)...



...politically and practically, it doesn't really matter. So what if China could have a weapon that could disable a carrier (note that it can't even sink one outright, just disable one. Theoretically.)? But so can a tactical nuke or the like, and effectively having a weapon that could theoretically threaten a carrier group doesn't outweigh the certainly that engaging a carrier group outright would bring down the full force of the US military on that poor, dumb general/admiral/politicians country. Sending a carrier group is a political symbol to 'stop fucking around' as much as it is a pragmatic, tangible application of military force.

author=Kaem
That carrier isn't deterring China in any way.

I can tell you through personal experience that the US Navy as an international deterrent is still the premier method of deterrence next to nuclear weaponry. I have been personally onboard when a scenario such as this happened with my carrier group;

"Hey, Country A has been actin' up, send a carrier group their way."

*carrier group arrives, Country A promptly shuts the fuck up*

Yes, in my experience, one of the countries in that scenario has also been China. I have personally witnessed China backing down in the face of my carrier group. One carrier group out of our eleven. There's political and military sword rattling, but when it comes down to it, countries almost certainly always, always, always back down in front of a carrier group. I can't think of any notable exceptions to this. Ever.

author=Kaem
The US Navy has had one role since the Vietnam War: droppin' bombs on brown people.

That's a gross oversimplification, the US Navy's primary role is force projection. When I was in the Navy, I was on many missions with my carrier group (and other carrier groups) and a relative scant few of them were dropping bombs on brown people. Not to mention humanitarian stuff, like the hurricane in Japan or natural disasters in the Philippines, believe it or not!

author=Kaem
AND re: basket weaving- you can't only fund the applied sciences. Sparta was all about its practicalities; training soldiers, showing Spartan children how to whip the helots correctly, but Athens loved their basket weaving and pottery classes. Who outlasted whom? Culture is a greater weapon than any rifle (although maybe not nuclear weapons).

The issue with this is that it costs someone a lot of money for something that never proves to be practical. A degree in basket weaving costs on the order of tens of thousands of dollars and years of time, to result in an individual who can't find a job doing that and contributes nothing to the economy, or himself/herself, and is a net drain. And in debt. And probably pretty unhappy. I'm not saying we should only do STEM stuff, and absolutely, there's nothing wrong with basket weaving (or gender studies, etc) classes, but college is an investment. Unless you have a dope ass inheritance or something it's just not practical for most people to have a degree in basket weaving.

@SnowOwl, college is (and should be) about becoming educated, and that covers a wide range of interests, sciences and other disciplines.

Yes, gender studies as a major is likely unwise purely from a career-selecting perspective, though how many well-paying jobs require only that you have any 4 year degree, and further, how many people end up in fields not related to their major?

It is a good thing that we have millions of people educated on thousands of different topics. I'm not sure about you, but I'd rather not live in a country with 300 million engineers.

author=Feldschlacht IV
Not only are there fundamental problems with the so called 'carrier killer' (including but not limited to the spoiler tag below)...

The American brass saying "uh we don't think these could actually sink our carriers probably" doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in me, considering they just found about these missiles, like, three years ago even though they've been around for a decade (at least). Also, disabling a carrier means inflicting tens of millions of dollars and probably months or years worth of repairs for a missile that China has at least a few dozen of in standing reserve. They have 2-3 missiles per carrier. That's not good math for the US Navy.

There's also a huge difference between nuclear and non-nuclear options, and you know that. Don't equate "well they could just launch da nukes!" with "here's all the ways they could fuck us without causing Armageddon".

author=Feldschlacht IV
I can tell you through personal experience that the US Navy as an international deterrent is still the premier method of deterrence next to nuclear weaponry.

Point taken. My line of thinking was more along the line of actual military contact rather than ensuring everyone remembers who has the biggest dick around. China does like to whip it out in their 'territorial' waters from time to time and needs to be reminded to not do that. I'm pretty sure the presence of a US missile cruiser would have much the same effect though, wouldn't it?

author=Feldschlacht IV
That's a gross oversimplification,

duh

author=Feldschlacht IV
the US Navy's primary role is force projection.

Projectin' that force right onto the heads of brown people amirite

author=Feldschlacht IV
Not to mention humanitarian stuff, like the hurricane in Japan or natural disasters in the Philippines, believe it or not!

Of course I believe it! The US Navy has a long history of helping out after natural disasters, as do many other military forces. It's the dollar cost of what they're doing between those crises that we're discussing. Ideally I'd like to say "other organizations could do it better and cheaper", but realistically first-world armies and navies just can't be beat when it comes to immediately disaster recovery.

I'll sum up by saying that I understand force projection, and that the US Navy is very important as an international police force that nobody really wants to admit to needing. My only real concern is that the military-industrial complex does a horrible, shit job at using dollars wisely. The military is very good at what it does, and generally those within the military don't waste money. It's kind of depressing that the only branch of the US government that seems to function reliably is the military. Unfortunately, for every dollar that goes where it is supposed to, there are nine that go somewhere else. das bad we agree

author=Feldschlacht IV
I'm not saying we should only do STEM stuff, and absolutely, there's nothing wrong with basket weaving (or gender studies, etc) classes, but college is an investment.

You know you take lots of other classes, regardless of what your major is, right? Both my parents have archaeology degrees from the same university. One became an actual archaeologist, the other became a fuckin' pension analyst. Most people (outside of post-grad) aren't employed for exactly the thing they went to school for. They get a BFA or a B.Sc and then apply to whatever is available. Most employers want a degree, and don't mind if it is in Philosophy instead of Human Resources Management. With the exception of two lawyers, everyone I know is employed outside their direct field of study. Even my STEM friends have jobs only sort of related to what they took.

author=SnowOwl
As a sidenote: You can probably learn everything theoretical most art degrees teach you in a couple of weeks on the net and then practicing the actual art yourself. That makes it actually worse to take those degrees than teaching yourself.

This is so untrue I am having trouble formulating an appropriate response.

author=Kaem
The American brass saying "uh we don't think these could actually sink our carriers probably" doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in me, considering they just found about these missiles, like, three years ago even though they've been around for a decade (at least).

But their points are valid regardless; most notably the inability to track its target, the vulnerability of launching sites, the reliability of Chinese recon satellites, and its untested capability to hit a moving target, most of these things that carrier groups have covered intrinsically. It's not like carriers are just chilling by themselves, they're surrounded by tons of other ships, subs, and aircraft, with interception, defenses, and countermeasures of their own.

author=Kaem
Also, disabling a carrier means inflicting tens of millions of dollars and probably months or years worth of repairs for a missile that China has at least a few dozen of in standing reserve. They have 2-3 missiles per carrier. That's not good math for the US Navy.

Disabling a carrier also means total war with the USA (and probably the rest of NATO). Aircraft carriers are the most expensive and valued (both economically and culturally) military assets/hardware in the US, and the world. Whether or not these missiles could destroy a carrier are realistically irrelevant; it would mean immediate war with the USA and likely the rest of NATO. It doesn't matter if they have 2-3 missiles per carrier or a hundred; engaging a carrier outright would mean absolute war with the USA that China could absolutely not win. All of America would be screaming for Beijing to be turned into a parking lot.

And it's not like we'd just throw carrier after carrier at them until they're all sunk (again, theoretically, assuming these missiles are even capable of that). In short, these missiles are a 'scare tactic'/'deterrent' that have no practical application and may not even work. Nothing in our deployments have changed since the introduction of these weapons.

The question is less 'can you destroy a carrier'? And more 'can you destroy a carrier and get away with it'? The answer for the entire planet so far is 'no'.

Maybe one day (likely decades from now) aircraft carriers will be obsolete, and spaceships will be the definition of the height of military power. Maybe one day a country will come up with a countermeasure that seriously tips the scales in their favor and away from us. That day won't be anytime soon though, and the USA spends tons and tons of our money to ensure that is it the case. The American military hegemony is bigger than most people know and it's absolutely terrifying, even to me, an American! The entire worldwide economy is held up by it.

There's also a huge difference between nuclear and non-nuclear options, and you know that. Don't equate "well they could just launch da nukes!" with "here's all the ways they could fuck us without causing Armageddon".

It was hyperbole to reflect that they're both deterrents with little practical real life application. But at least nukes work, in terms of actual damage and geopolitics. Poor choice perhaps, yeah!

author=Kaem
I'm pretty sure the presence of a US missile cruiser would have much the same effect though, wouldn't it?

No, carrier groups have far more force projection/power. It's about responding to force with overwhelming force. Many countries can field a missile cruiser. No country can field an equivalent to a carrier strike group.

author=Kaem
It's kind of depressing that the only branch of the US government that seems to function reliably is the military.

It's the most visible, but it's not the only one that functions reliably. For all the shit we get for government services, the USA does quite a lot with what we have and the ground/population we manage.

author=Kaem
You know you take lots of other classes, regardless of what your major is, right? Both my parents have archaeology degrees from the same university. One became an actual archaeologist, the other became a fuckin' pension analyst. Most people (outside of post-grad) aren't employed for exactly the thing they went to school for. They get a BFA or a B.Sc and then apply to whatever is available. Most employers want a degree, and don't mind if it is in Philosophy instead of Human Resources Management. With the exception of two lawyers, everyone I know is employed outside their direct field of study. Even my STEM friends have jobs only sort of related to what they took.

I think that would be all fine and dandy if education wasn't so expensive. I'm cool with someone getting a basket weaving degree if that's what they really want; I'm not cool with someone having to spend tens of thousands of dollars getting that degree to maybe find a decent job.

author=Solitayre

author=kentona

The Greeks have a word for the emerging Trump Administration: kakistocracy. The American Heritage Dictionary defines it as a "government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens."

wow. it only took a week before the populist fascist devolved into outright cronyism. He names 3 kids and son-in-law to transition team, while the rest are Washington insiders and influential lobbyists. So much for draining the swamp.

Anyone who thought Trump was going to clean up Washington was dreaming.

Agreed. With all of the people complaining about corporate greed needing to be removed from politics, we screwed up by voting him in. Now the corporate greed's power level has risen. *insert further DBZ joke material*

SnowOwl
I, on the other hand, think that would be awesome. I can only imagine all the cool stuff that would get built.

I can't imagine it'd be much. After all, in a country of 300 million engineers, there'd be no farmers to grow food, no grocers to get imported food to us (and no chefs to feed us sushi!), no doctors to keep us healthy, no lowly clerks to keep our records filed and legal, no cashiers to make sure we can pay for the things we need. In fact, most of those engineers would have to take jobs that have nothing to do with engineering, and they would never accomplish anything as engineers, and as such, we wouldn't be a country of 300 million engineers. Besides, I like having artists around to inspire the engineers, performers to delight them, musicians to keep their souls healthy, and chefs to feed them sushi and sashimi and New York style pizza and tacos and Philly cheese-steaks. I don't think I'd like a country without those people.

@MOG:
All fair points, although I really do think the Chinese missiles are more effective than you think they are. Sure, lots could go wrong, but that's a lot of finger crossing. China has the fastest supercomputer in the world; they're no slouches when it comes to tech, and it's a mistake to underestimate them. You're absolutely right about China trying to sink a carrier leading to war, of course. Let's hope we never get to see which one of us is right.

Although the idea of carrier after carrier in a line-up sailing to their doom made me laugh out loud. "Shouldn't we change course, sir?" "Trump's commander-in-chief, son, and these are his orders."

re: school though; What I'm saying is that a Basket Weaving degree is just as expensive as any other non-STEM degree, and because there is a 75%+ overlap in courses in most bachelor degrees, you learn almost as much. I'm not defending taking super niche courses and agree it's a questionable decision, but they're far from useless degrees. Like I said, one of my parents got an archaeology degree and immediately got a job way outside the field. She met the requirements (usually just "college degree") and interviewed well, just like a lot of those basket weavers will. Besides, SOMEONE's gotta weave those fuckin' baskets.

I did know a guy who got a doctorate in folklore. Eight+ years of school and there is a single job available to him: professor of folklore. Why!?

@SnowOwl

And imagine how much information we wouldn't have because nobody is studying sociology.