By:
Advanced search…

Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

military flyovers at sports events could be stopped due to sequester

maybe instead they can show a quick video montage of civilians killed or maimed by U.S. airstrikes in the past decade?

People might get offended though...
 
I have no doubt in Dave Brandon's ability to find a replacement spectacle.
 
Well I sure hope this sequester doesn't cut into Air Force One's funding to fly Obama around the country so he can point fingers and blame Republicans for the sequester. That would be a tragedy!

Politicians are amazing people.
 
thewolverines24 said:
Well I sure hope this sequester doesn't cut into Air Force One's funding to fly Obama around the country so he can point fingers and blame Republicans for the sequester. That would be a tragedy!

Politicians are amazing people.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that it would not. It doesn't appear to affect day-to-day operations...
Now, again, the sequester is a relatively small number at $85 billion, but it's not even going to be all that, because some of that's not going to be cash. It's going to change the budget authority. It means you can't contract for a school or an aircraft carrier or something that's got a multiyear life, but it doesn't change cash flows, because that wasn't meant to be spent this year anyway. So, the Congressional Budget Office says that out of the $85 billion, really $42 billion will be cash not spent.
​
so you can rest easy.

and also you can rest assured that this "crisis" and the idea that "spending was out of control" was also entirely made up of whole cloth, and any trained economist who was not also a Fox News commentator would tell you that we were nowhere near spending so much money that the US's ability to borrow, or meet its existing debt obligations would be affected.

despite all the hoopla over Standard and Poor's downgrade of the US' credit rating, interest rates on US gov't debt actually went down and prices have gone up as investors bought them... i.e. over Obama's tenure, it has actually become cheaper for the US government to borrow money.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
michchamp said:
My understanding is that it would not. It doesn't appear to affect day-to-day operations...
Now, again, the sequester is a relatively small number at $85 billion, but it's not even going to be all that, because some of that's not going to be cash. It's going to change the budget authority. It means you can't contract for a school or an aircraft carrier or something that's got a multiyear life, but it doesn't change cash flows, because that wasn't meant to be spent this year anyway. So, the Congressional Budget Office says that out of the $85 billion, really $42 billion will be cash not spent.
​
so you can rest easy.

and also you can rest assured that this "crisis" and the idea that "spending was out of control" was also entirely made up of whole cloth, and any trained economist who was not also a Fox News commentator would tell you that we were nowhere near spending so much money that the US's ability to borrow, or meet its existing debt obligations would be affected.

despite all the hoopla over Standard and Poor's downgrade of the US' credit rating, interest rates on US gov't debt actually went down and prices have gone up as investors bought them... i.e. over Obama's tenure, it has actually become cheaper for the US government to borrow money.
Click to expand...

Yeah the sensationalism in the media is something to marvel. I just hate all the finger pointing BS politicians pull. Obama doesn't need to fly around the country rallying people to blame Republicans for the sequester. That is the definition of a waste of money. Everyone get to work and figure it out. Like real working people do every day.

Assholes.
 
Last edited:
I will be pissed if the TSA and other Air-traffic controller positions are impacted and travel slows ...

That said, there is usually a 2:1 ratio of TSA agents standing around with their thumbs up their ass compared to those working ...
 
TheVictors said:
I will be pissed if the TSA and other Air-traffic controller positions are impacted and travel slows ...

That said, there is usually a 2:1 ratio of TSA agents standing around with their thumbs up their ass compared to those working ...
Click to expand...

Aren't they sticking their thumbs up our asses these days?
 
Seems like the military could make money with the flyovers if they only charged for them. Some would pay for them. Just saying it could help offset dome of their expensed, small though it would be obviously.
 
zyxt9 said:
Seems like the military could make money with the flyovers if they only charged for them. Some would pay for them. Just saying it could help offset dome of their expensed, small though it would be obviously.
Click to expand...

I believe the Packers have a donor who pays for any flyover at Lambeau.
 
michchamp said:
you can rest assured that this "crisis" and the idea that "spending was out of control" was also entirely made up of whole cloth
Click to expand...

It's not made up, but the talking heads are failing to aknowledge the improvements we've seen in the last 3 years.

The deficit spike at the end of Bush's last year and through Obama's first was scary. I don't know how you could look at things through 2009 and think that idea is made up. It's still high, but since then the spike it's been coming down at a fairly steady pace. If things continue to improve at the current pace we'll be ok. In the past 3 years, the deficit has come down by a quarter. Relative to GDP, it's getting better about as quickly as most of Clinton's time or most of Bush's 2nd term.
MSP12621a5a14168i9hi48b00005g9ffcdeg4dh8ghc


The $85 Billion everyone is talking about is about half a tick mark on this plot. It's not an insignificant amount, but nothing to freak out over either. Half a tick mark a year is about the slope in those 3 areas where things were improving.
 
Last edited:
I'd advocate a military flyover of (an empty) Ohio* Stadium that involved a naplam carpet bombing.
 
redandguilty said:
It's not made up, but the talking heads are failing to aknowledge the improvements we've seen in the last 3 years.

The deficit spike at the end of Bush's last year and through Obama's first was scary. ...
MSP12621a5a14168i9hi48b00005g9ffcdeg4dh8ghc


...
Click to expand...

Why is that scary? This isn't a static thing; spending has to be understood in reference to GDP and revenues.

by some accounts, spending actually went down almost immediately under Obama, as the firehose of cash in Iraq was shut down.

and other increases were not discretionary, but were triggered by job losses and other consequences of the 2008 crash... which is what was SUPPOSED to happen... it's what welfare and unemployment insurance was designed to do decades ago.
 
michchamp said:
Why is that scary? This isn't a static thing; spending has to be understood in reference to GDP and revenues.

by some accounts, spending actually went down almost immediately under Obama, as the firehose of cash in Iraq was shut down.

and other increases were not discretionary, but were triggered by job losses and other consequences of the 2008 crash... which is what was SUPPOSED to happen... it's what welfare and unemployment insurance was designed to do decades ago.
Click to expand...

Apparently the plot is only good for an hour or so. I did plot it relative to GDP.

http://www3.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=us+deficit/us+gdp

That 2008-2009 period is scary...relative to GDP. But like I said before, it's been getting better since then.
 
Last edited:
Just. wow. Our political affiliations now are so strong, we give CREDIT to a guy who makes it CHEAPER to do something wrong. But then again, it's also amazing how the other guys only care about spending issues when they're not in power.

On topic, frankly, taxpayers should not be expected to fund unnecessary military flyovers at sporting events; let the donors pay for them if they're that important. While I thank the OP for posting it (I hadn't thought of it) I don't think it's really much of anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

Founded in 2011, Detroit Sports Forum is a community of fanatics dedicated to teams like the Lions, Tigers, Pistons, Red Wings, Wolverines, and more. We live and breathe Detroit sports!

Stay Connected

Forum statistics

Threads
32,892
Messages
1,109,081
Members
942
Latest member
Proud Pheasant

Affiliates

    Discussion Hub
Back
Top